The irony of the cry for less government

he didn't because it would have exposed his errors ignorance. Bury with BS is a normal liberal tactic

 

how is freedom crazy???

 

I'm still waiting for you to provide evidence to your claim:




Then you followed up with a claim about the rich giving most of their money to charity when they die.

If you want a conversation with me, you either need to admit you were wrong, or provide evidence to your claims.

You don't get to move forward in conversation when you've been flat out proven to be wrong, which in-and-of-itself is ok, we're all wrong from time-to-time. My problem with you is you want to make claims that are flat out false in order to prove whatever point you wish to prove, but when you're shown to be wrong, you refuse to accept reality.

I'm not a psychologist, but your refusal to accept evidence, you're lashing out at others, your inability to accept correction and your insulting people on the basis of belonging to a particular social or ideological group and just flat out making up things appears to be seated in some sort of psychological disorder.

/shrug.

 

Then please, enlighten me. Explain what I said in a way that the average person can understand in two sentences.

 

please cut the BS if you have something substantive against conservatism or libertarianism tell us what it is instead of hiding behind long boring posts.

 

there was no topic that Friedman didn't handle in 1/3 of the page in his Newsweek columns.

 

how can something so mistaken be explained at any length?? With each new paragraph you merely bury yourself deeper.

 

The average person cannot understand macroeconomics.

So forget that.

 

if true name some part of it they cant understand!!!

 

you said it could have been explained in 1-2 sentences now you say it cant be explained??

 

You realize the contradiction there right?

 

why not tell us rather than always play games

 

It's stunning how you can avoid being wrong in your own mind. That also has a name. It's called cognitive dissonance. Now I can point out your personal flaws every time you reply because facts don't seem to phase you. The fact is you were either mistaken, at best, or lied at worst about what you said. Now you won't own it. Every time you respond to me, I'm going to remind you.

 

You tried to create a mini analysis of macroeconomics for everyday people.

How funny !!

 

You realize that came about due to government regulation don't you?

 

as long as I'm not wrong in the mind of Milton Friedman. Isn't that what matters?? Isn't thinking fun?

 

you're going to remind me why socialism is superior to capitalism or try to bury the subject in long boring BS because you are afraid to debate

 

and you said it could be explained in 1-2 sentences??? now what do you say?

 

First I'm not a liberal. Second I'm not a conservative. In my book they are one and the same using a different view of slavery to justify fighting among themselves but their goals are the same none the less.

Debate, first one must have knowledge on the subject to be able to debate, otherwise it is just a battle of emotional outburst about nothing.

Now, other than perhaps cashing a few checks, have you ever read or studied any of the attributes or causation of the effects of welfare on poverty, like perhaps to start minimum wage? If in a couple of years you have perhaps managed to obtain to gain enough knowledge to last more than 10 minutes, come on back and if I'm still alive we can have a go at it.

 

how so??

 

so what is conservative slavery and liberal slavery and what are you if not liberal or conservative?????

 

if you have evidence to back your silly assertion that you know more than me I will pay you $10,000 .Bet??

 

I'm saying what I say, how you feel you must interpret it is up to you. Do I discriminate against the rich, no but I do kick some crumbs down to the poor on occasion.

Of course it's ok to discriminate against the practice of religion. Why do they need to practice, are they unsure of which god they have to have supreme? Of course that would be inaccurate for most as government is the supreme god, they are just unsure of which god is next. Not a problem really as the second god only exist at at the auspices of the supreme god's agent, the IRS.

 

Or lack thereof.

I agree that government has influenced what we see today, but not necessarily through regulation, but the strategic removal of regulation (though I freely admit there are examples of both).

Rules and laws put in place embracing the idea that the market will regulate itself are pure fantasy.

The implicit claim in your statement is that more government regulation = greater inequity.

It's not a binary choice. There are millions of ways to do government that increases inequity and there are millions of ways that it can promote equity.

See, fundamentally, there is even a difference of opinion about equity and equality and which one, we, as a nation, should strive for.

Equality demands that we all start off the same, that we are given nothing we cannot earn for ourselves. Equity promotes the idea that we should be given the basic minimum of opportunity to finish the same. That's not to say that I think we should promote the idea that we can all finish the same, or that it would even be possible, but we can remove some basic "hurtles" very early on. Education, healthcare, shelter, food. If you grow up without adequate access to these basic needs, then you start out behind others who, through the lottery of their birth are provided opportunity just because of who they are or who they know.

Metaphorically, think of it like a bike race. If one person has a flat (a person who grew up poor) and the other doesn't, that's inequity. But if you believe in equality you believe that helping the rider with a flat is unfair because the rider without a flat received nothing that is unequal in some people's minds. All I'm saying is that no one should start out their adult life with a proverbial flat. Once the race begins both riders should have the chance to finish competitively based on their skills as adults. That makes for a better race and when talking about our nation, makes for a better country, IMO.

 

Still waiting for you to substantiate your claim.

If you think you can chide me into moving past this, you are even more childish then I thought.