Can I be conservative, liberal, progressive all at once or do I have to pick only one

[pvsi]

the way you can identify yourself it the way you VOTE.

because the paradigm is always either-or - there are only 2 ways to identify it.

I agree that one might have more conservative fiscal views and more liberal social ones or vice verse - but it is what you want to compromise when you choose whom you you vote for - THAT identifies you.

If you state that you are socially conservative but consistently vote dimocrap because you also receive hefty union benefits - there is no question where you really belong to in classification

If you state that your views on social issues coincide with Noam Chomsky but you still vote for a conservative candidate as you can't stand government waste and intrusion - that is also very telling what you are and where you belong in classification.

It is pretty easy in the political system we have in the US.

It is a bit more complicated in a system where more than 2 parties exist.

But I can only vote in my head, because I've come to realize that there are no real elections in America any more than there were in USSR - people just like to believe in things...

 

[pvsi]

Something...anything?

Hmm...crickets

Still crickets...

Tell you what Bom, why don't you simply address this one point raised above. Please answer this question with specificity and we'll take it from there.

Is that possible? Any chance?

I also am anxiously waiting for his reply to this

 

[pvsi]

If government did not meddle outside of their limited powers and therefore had NO ability to grant favors, tax loopholes, bailouts, or any other forms of favoritism to these evil corporations, tell us EXACTLY how these companies would be able to exert their power over people. When you answer, please remember that you can't point to something that is already covered by those limited powers granted to the government (like child slavery for instance). No, you must tell us how companies would exert their power over people in a world where government was limited to its enumerated powers.

Please be specific and give us one example. The floor is yours...

Through the market and people's dependence on making money so they can eat. Thus the conversation about how people in such a position have literally sold themselves and their children into slavery and indentured servitude so that they can eat.

A more technical way to talk about it is to refer to it as inelastic demand.

Another market problem is imperfect information. This relates to things like snake oil salesmen or our modern day pharmaceutical industry which is regulated by the government to ensure not only good information but that safety standards are met. This industry has been caught numerous times trying to bribe doctors and lie to consumers.

There is also a history of there being unequal access to the "factors of production" for all sorts of reasons from racism to sexism to classism to simple favoritism.

Bon my friend, let me tell you a little bit of history using myself as an example: I finally bought a small piece of land far away from the city in 2008 in Allegheny national forest after nearly 2 decades of living in what I call a hell hole city of Philadelphia (DC for couple year before that). I have a small business where me and my dad work with concrete, and we are fortunate to make enough income to get by. I LOVE gardening, I have too many fruit, nut, grape, berry tree varieties to name. if it’s good and grows in this cold climate, I have it, because as I mentioned before somewhere I’m a thrifty shopper and I bought small plants on ebay cheap.

My walnut and hazelnut trees for example after 5 years still no nuts. grapes I am still having trouble duplicating due to lack of experience, it is taking me over 4 years to have enough asparagus, and the only cherry trees that finally produced decent crop last year was the variety that I almost decided to dig up to make space for other trees. (bear with me, I’m getting to the point)

Due to my frustration with the system I offend a lot of people, and people seem to be frustrated with my lack of appreciation of this country and the opportunity it provides... Should I be thankful that I was able to buy this land and have this freedom, or should American patriots realize that had the international bankers who funded socialism, who control America, and the GOP, and yes possibly even libertarian party (I do not know) that had this ruling class and their puppet governments have not thrown out my ancestors from their land, possibility is that I would have still been living in my old country, with full gardening experience I have learned from my grand parents, avoiding mistakes, much more independent from job creators and able to produce more than I myself can eat and have more free time to spend with my dogs, my father, my wife.

Finally, please watch this 4 minute video of a very related story I just told you:
(I do NOT believe that the people who are buying up this land for their vacation spots have to worry about having enough to eat, but they half likely preach for democrats since it's a good disguise to hide their wealth)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-BFNL0p8zs]Slave descendents fight tax hikes - YouTube[/ame]

 

[FA_Q2]

You are like me and the vast majority of other Americans. We don't fit neatly into pigeon holes.

I congratulate you for not being tied to an "ism" - it's rough sledding sometimes. So many are too lazy to listen and interact l;ong enough to get a complete picture of who you really are in full. They're too lazy - so they'd rather just slap a label on you and be done with you.

It's lazy and it's ignorant - but unfortunately that the way most posters on these boards are. But message boards are not the real world - I hope you have happy interaction here and - more importantly - in the real world.

Typically that means that you're a Democrat who supports the Democratic party on every issue, but you don't like to be thought of that way.

PERFECT example of the mindset around here. I think most carry little boxes and plain labels with a big ol marker so they can stuff others in that little box and then neatly label it with their marker.

I will never understand the hatred of ‘labels.’ It is completely unfounded. Just because you identify yourself as a democrat or conservative does not make you conform to all of the positions of that party. Nor do you have to remain under such a label. For myself, I don’t identify with any party but consider myself a libertarian. Just because I am a libertarian does not mean that I am going to agree with all the positions of other libertarians. I was not always calling myself a libertarian either. I used to think that I was a conservative until I examined what other conservatives actually believe and the context in which they construct their worldview rather than what is said or written. I found that my worldview is MUCH closer to a libertarian point of view. Me, dblack and eflat (just to name a few of the libertarians here) have had some differences that we have debated here before.

A label is a tool and nothing more. If I were to explain my political viewpoint each and every time that I entered into a debate there would be a wall of text that would take pages and completely detract from the debate. Why would I want to do such a thing? If I chose not to but also kept my label hidden because I didn’t want to choose one then the reader has no concept of where I am coming from or how I view the world/debate. That label conveys a rather large amount of information to the intended reader is a very simple and succinct way.

In all honesty, l have only ever found a single reason that someone does not want to accept a label for their beliefs: they have not fully formed them. Several of my friends that claim to not have a ‘label’ quite frankly simply did not have a political worldview for lack of information/interest. If you have such than you should adopt one such label that BEST describes your worldview. It is not perfect but it helps us understand how you view things. Also, I use worldview because positions are not really that important in this context because they are nuanced – there is a LOT more to most positions than yea or nay. The method that you approach that position, in my mind, is what separates us into rough political categories.

 

[FA_Q2]

All these terms sound nice and seem to apply to me: I am a thrifty shopper, I live a conservative lifestyle, I love to see progress every day, I am liberal when it comes to certain things... are these names strictly reserved for political pundits, or can I consider myself all 3? and if I do, will I still be taken seriously on this playing field of politics? please advise...

You are simply being yourself and not pigeonholing yourself into one ideology or another.

A ‘label’ does not pigeon hole you into anything. Instead, it conveys some basic information about how you approach your political worldview. A democrat does not support the democrat political party platform 100 percent. They just tend to agree with them more than they do with other parties/political affiliations.

 

[Bombur]

If government did not meddle outside of their limited powers and therefore had NO ability to grant favors, tax loopholes, bailouts, or any other forms of favoritism to these evil corporations, tell us EXACTLY how these companies would be able to exert their power over people. When you answer, please remember that you can't point to something that is already covered by those limited powers granted to the government (like child slavery for instance). No, you must tell us how companies would exert their power over people in a world where government was limited to its enumerated powers.

Please be specific and give us one example. The floor is yours...

Through the market and people's dependence on making money so they can eat. Thus the conversation about how people in such a position have literally sold themselves and their children into slavery and indentured servitude so that they can eat.

A more technical way to talk about it is to refer to it as inelastic demand.

Another market problem is imperfect information. This relates to things like snake oil salesmen or our modern day pharmaceutical industry which is regulated by the government to ensure not only good information but that safety standards are met. This industry has been caught numerous times trying to bribe doctors and lie to consumers.

There is also a history of there being unequal access to the "factors of production" for all sorts of reasons from racism to sexism to classism to simple favoritism.

Bon my friend, let me tell you a little bit of history using myself as an example: I finally bought a small piece of land far away from the city in 2008 in Allegheny national forest after nearly 2 decades of living in what I call a hell hole city of Philadelphia (DC for couple year before that). I have a small business where me and my dad work with concrete, and we are fortunate to make enough income to get by. I LOVE gardening, I have too many fruit, nut, grape, berry tree varieties to name. if it’s good and grows in this cold climate, I have it, because as I mentioned before somewhere I’m a thrifty shopper and I bought small plants on ebay cheap.

My walnut and hazelnut trees for example after 5 years still no nuts. grapes I am still having trouble duplicating due to lack of experience, it is taking me over 4 years to have enough asparagus, and the only cherry trees that finally produced decent crop last year was the variety that I almost decided to dig up to make space for other trees. (bear with me, I’m getting to the point)

Due to my frustration with the system I offend a lot of people, and people seem to be frustrated with my lack of appreciation of this country and the opportunity it provides... Should I be thankful that I was able to buy this land and have this freedom, or should American patriots realize that had the international bankers who funded socialism, who control America, and the GOP, and yes possibly even libertarian party (I do not know) that had this ruling class and their puppet governments have not thrown out my ancestors from their land, possibility is that I would have still been living in my old country, with full gardening experience I have learned from my grand parents, avoiding mistakes, much more independent from job creators and able to produce more than I myself can eat and have more free time to spend with my dogs, my father, my wife.

Finally, please watch this 4 minute video of a very related story I just told you:
(I do NOT believe that the people who are buying up this land for their vacation spots have to worry about having enough to eat, but they half likely preach for democrats since it's a good disguise to hide their wealth)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-BFNL0p8zs]Slave descendents fight tax hikes - YouTube[/ame]

I was talking about history and the nature of markets.

I am making a point about how markets don't always produce great results even when there is voluntary participation on both sides. You see the libertarians want to leave pretty much everything to the market. Something that this nation has never really done. Instead we have tried to take care of each other and we shared a moral obligation to one another. Not everyone wants to live like this anymore even though every single industrialized nation has realized they can't just ignore their poor.

The politics is ridiculous and the only reason why it has any attention at all is because it is funded by billionaires who couldn't give a crap about you or me or science or anything else for that matter.

 

[FA_Q2]

If government did not meddle outside of their limited powers and therefore had NO ability to grant favors, tax loopholes, bailouts, or any other forms of favoritism to these evil corporations, tell us EXACTLY how these companies would be able to exert their power over people. When you answer, please remember that you can't point to something that is already covered by those limited powers granted to the government (like child slavery for instance). No, you must tell us how companies would exert their power over people in a world where government was limited to its enumerated powers.

Please be specific and give us one example. The floor is yours...

Through the market and people's dependence on making money so they can eat. Thus the conversation about how people in such a position have literally sold themselves and their children into slavery and indentured servitude so that they can eat.

A more technical way to talk about it is to refer to it as inelastic demand.

Another market problem is imperfect information. This relates to things like snake oil salesmen or our modern day pharmaceutical industry which is regulated by the government to ensure not only good information but that safety standards are met. This industry has been caught numerous times trying to bribe doctors and lie to consumers.

There is also a history of there being unequal access to the "factors of production" for all sorts of reasons from racism to sexism to classism to simple favoritism.

Bon my friend, let me tell you a little bit of history using myself as an example: I finally bought a small piece of land far away from the city in 2008 in Allegheny national forest after nearly 2 decades of living in what I call a hell hole city of Philadelphia (DC for couple year before that). I have a small business where me and my dad work with concrete, and we are fortunate to make enough income to get by. I LOVE gardening, I have too many fruit, nut, grape, berry tree varieties to name. if it’s good and grows in this cold climate, I have it, because as I mentioned before somewhere I’m a thrifty shopper and I bought small plants on ebay cheap.

My walnut and hazelnut trees for example after 5 years still no nuts. grapes I am still having trouble duplicating due to lack of experience, it is taking me over 4 years to have enough asparagus, and the only cherry trees that finally produced decent crop last year was the variety that I almost decided to dig up to make space for other trees. (bear with me, I’m getting to the point)

Due to my frustration with the system I offend a lot of people, and people seem to be frustrated with my lack of appreciation of this country and the opportunity it provides... Should I be thankful that I was able to buy this land and have this freedom, or should American patriots realize that had the international bankers who funded socialism, who control America, and the GOP, and yes possibly even libertarian party (I do not know) that had this ruling class and their puppet governments have not thrown out my ancestors from their land, possibility is that I would have still been living in my old country, with full gardening experience I have learned from my grand parents, avoiding mistakes, much more independent from job creators and able to produce more than I myself can eat and have more free time to spend with my dogs, my father, my wife.

Finally, please watch this 4 minute video of a very related story I just told you:
(I do NOT believe that the people who are buying up this land for their vacation spots have to worry about having enough to eat, but they half likely preach for democrats since it's a good disguise to hide their wealth)

Good video. This is why I am a libertarian. I recognize the corruption that is pervasive in a system that actually owns your ‘possessions’ rather than you owning them. In a system where power is brokered to individual entities through the government and the government has complete control over virtually anything that you do or partake in. The concept of personal property and rights have been lost in modern America.

I don’t think that having frustration or recognizing that something is seriously wrong is ‘not having an appreciation of this country and the opportunity it provides.’ I think the exact opposite – that is recognition that such opportunity is seeping away as we chip away at freedoms we are supposed to be secure in.

 

[Vox]

But I can only vote in my head, because I've come to realize that there are no real elections in America any more than there were in USSR - people just like to believe in things...

then you are a brainwashed OWS anarchist

you don't know what it was in the USSR, so stop referring to that country.
You were 13 when you immigrated - that is not the age to understand and know, so stop.

 

[Vox]

My walnut and hazelnut trees for example after 5 years still no nuts

5 years is not enough to have nuts ( depends on the starting size).

and I can bet you made a very common mistake when planting walnuts.

 

[Pogo]

Typically that means that you're a Democrat who supports the Democratic party on every issue, but you don't like to be thought of that way.

PERFECT example of the mindset around here. I think most carry little boxes and plain labels with a big ol marker so they can stuff others in that little box and then neatly label it with their marker.

I will never understand the hatred of ‘labels.’ It is completely unfounded. Just because you identify yourself as a democrat or conservative does not make you conform to all of the positions of that party. Nor do you have to remain under such a label. For myself, I don’t identify with any party but consider myself a libertarian. Just because I am a libertarian does not mean that I am going to agree with all the positions of other libertarians. I was not always calling myself a libertarian either. I used to think that I was a conservative until I examined what other conservatives actually believe and the context in which they construct their worldview rather than what is said or written. I found that my worldview is MUCH closer to a libertarian point of view. Me, dblack and eflat (just to name a few of the libertarians here) have had some differences that we have debated here before.

A label is a tool and nothing more. If I were to explain my political viewpoint each and every time that I entered into a debate there would be a wall of text that would take pages and completely detract from the debate. Why would I want to do such a thing? If I chose not to but also kept my label hidden because I didn’t want to choose one then the reader has no concept of where I am coming from or how I view the world/debate. That label conveys a rather large amount of information to the intended reader is a very simple and succinct way.

In all honesty, l have only ever found a single reason that someone does not want to accept a label for their beliefs: they have not fully formed them. Several of my friends that claim to not have a ‘label’ quite frankly simply did not have a political worldview for lack of information/interest. If you have such than you should adopt one such label that BEST describes your worldview. It is not perfect but it helps us understand how you view things. Also, I use worldview because positions are not really that important in this context because they are nuanced – there is a LOT more to most positions than yea or nay. The method that you approach that position, in my mind, is what separates us into rough political categories.

It's well founded, and it's extremely simple.

The function of labels in a forum like this is to facilitate blanket generalizations so that that fallacy can then be used as a crutch for a lame pseudoargument. That's it.

Take me for instance. Did you know I'm an O'bama worshipper, an abortionist, a communist, a Democrat, a welfare soaker, and a gun-grabber? I didn't either, since I've never posted any of that, ever.

That's what labels do. Foment ignorance and dehumanize.

**** that. **** that left-brained categorization obsession and **** the little boxes, which Gracie described exactly right. **** the labels and grok. If you want my opinion on A, just ask. But that does not serve as a predictor of my opinions on B, C, or Q.

 

[eflatminor]

Through the market and people's dependence on making money so they can eat.

Let's get this straight. In response to the question 'How would these companies be able to exert their power over people without help from meddling politicians?', your answer is...people have to eat?

Did I get that right?

Seriously? Are you really this shallow? This ignorant?

Amazing that in the pre-Progressive era anyone ate, isn't it?

Hey, dumbshit, OF COURSE everyone needs to eat. That does not however answer the question as to EXACTLY HOW these companies could exert power of people. You are free to work for a company, or not. You are free to move to seek employment. You are free to make a living on your own. You are free to start your own company and be as benevolent as you wish.

Sorry, but you might as well have answered with "because the sky is blue". Your answer makes no sense and the rest of your comments are equally unrelated and nonsensical. Without the force of law behind any particular company, you are free to choose an alternative for employment, for products or for services. Anyone with a modicum of common sense understands this.

My goodness, what a low opinion you have or yourself. I can't image anyone believing themselves to be so damn pathetic that they are unable to make choices in their own best interest...that they require an overlord to guide them through life. It's just sad, really. Anyway, best of luck to you. You need it.

Like I said, naive and ignorant crap.

History proves me right and you wrong. Unlike you I can think about people other than myself. The true sign of someone who is completely ignorant about market economics is that they always reduce entire markets to single people.

We understand. You got nothing. Crystal clear.

Best of luck you to.

 

[Bombur]

Let's get this straight. In response to the question 'How would these companies be able to exert their power over people without help from meddling politicians?', your answer is...people have to eat?

Did I get that right?

Seriously? Are you really this shallow? This ignorant?

Amazing that in the pre-Progressive era anyone ate, isn't it?

Hey, dumbshit, OF COURSE everyone needs to eat. That does not however answer the question as to EXACTLY HOW these companies could exert power of people. You are free to work for a company, or not. You are free to move to seek employment. You are free to make a living on your own. You are free to start your own company and be as benevolent as you wish.

Sorry, but you might as well have answered with "because the sky is blue". Your answer makes no sense and the rest of your comments are equally unrelated and nonsensical. Without the force of law behind any particular company, you are free to choose an alternative for employment, for products or for services. Anyone with a modicum of common sense understands this.

My goodness, what a low opinion you have or yourself. I can't image anyone believing themselves to be so damn pathetic that they are unable to make choices in their own best interest...that they require an overlord to guide them through life. It's just sad, really. Anyway, best of luck to you. You need it.

Like I said, naive and ignorant crap.

History proves me right and you wrong. Unlike you I can think about people other than myself. The true sign of someone who is completely ignorant about market economics is that they always reduce entire markets to single people.

We understand. You got nothing. Crystal clear.

Best of luck you to.

LOL

It is impossible to argue someone who is a true believer like yourself. Child labor is a rather straight forward example of how inelastic labor markets can lead to bad results.

Are you denying that?

The problem you have is that you can't talk about market economic because you are either ignorant or know that actually talking about them will expose the problems markets have all on their own even without government.

You are also clearly ignorant about the regressive nature of your own tax policy ideas and you put forth a ridiculous argument about going back to the economies and government policies of 200 years ago and then acted like I had to prove you wrong.

You are no different then those people who have decided the earth is 6000 years old and won't hear anything to the contrary.

 

[pvsi]

Through the market and people's dependence on making money so they can eat. Thus the conversation about how people in such a position have literally sold themselves and their children into slavery and indentured servitude so that they can eat.

A more technical way to talk about it is to refer to it as inelastic demand.

Another market problem is imperfect information. This relates to things like snake oil salesmen or our modern day pharmaceutical industry which is regulated by the government to ensure not only good information but that safety standards are met. This industry has been caught numerous times trying to bribe doctors and lie to consumers.

There is also a history of there being unequal access to the "factors of production" for all sorts of reasons from racism to sexism to classism to simple favoritism.

Bon my friend, let me tell you a little bit of history using myself as an example: I finally bought a small piece of land far away from the city in 2008 in Allegheny national forest after nearly 2 decades of living in what I call a hell hole city of Philadelphia (DC for couple year before that). I have a small business where me and my dad work with concrete, and we are fortunate to make enough income to get by. I LOVE gardening, I have too many fruit, nut, grape, berry tree varieties to name. if it’s good and grows in this cold climate, I have it, because as I mentioned before somewhere I’m a thrifty shopper and I bought small plants on ebay cheap.

My walnut and hazelnut trees for example after 5 years still no nuts. grapes I am still having trouble duplicating due to lack of experience, it is taking me over 4 years to have enough asparagus, and the only cherry trees that finally produced decent crop last year was the variety that I almost decided to dig up to make space for other trees. (bear with me, I’m getting to the point)

Due to my frustration with the system I offend a lot of people, and people seem to be frustrated with my lack of appreciation of this country and the opportunity it provides... Should I be thankful that I was able to buy this land and have this freedom, or should American patriots realize that had the international bankers who funded socialism, who control America, and the GOP, and yes possibly even libertarian party (I do not know) that had this ruling class and their puppet governments have not thrown out my ancestors from their land, possibility is that I would have still been living in my old country, with full gardening experience I have learned from my grand parents, avoiding mistakes, much more independent from job creators and able to produce more than I myself can eat and have more free time to spend with my dogs, my father, my wife.

Finally, please watch this 4 minute video of a very related story I just told you:
(I do NOT believe that the people who are buying up this land for their vacation spots have to worry about having enough to eat, but they half likely preach for democrats since it's a good disguise to hide their wealth)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-BFNL0p8zs]Slave descendents fight tax hikes - YouTube[/ame]

I was talking about history and the nature of markets.

I am making a point about how markets don't always produce great results even when there is voluntary participation on both sides. You see the libertarians want to leave pretty much everything to the market. Something that this nation has never really done. Instead we have tried to take care of each other and we shared a moral obligation to one another. Not everyone wants to live like this anymore even though every single industrialized nation has realized they can't just ignore their poor.

The politics is ridiculous and the only reason why it has any attention at all is because it is funded by billionaires who couldn't give a crap about you or me or science or anything else for that matter.

And, as I just brilliantly demonstrated, neither does taxation and socialism - In America today, we have an ILLUSION of balance of power, NOT capitalism or socialism. I will not defend Libertarians, because all parties talk nice saying they care about constitution, but until they obtain power, they do not show their true colors.

 

[pvsi]

Good video. This is why I am a libertarian. I recognize the corruption that is pervasive in a system that actually owns your ‘possessions’ rather than you owning them. In a system where power is brokered to individual entities through the government and the government has complete control over virtually anything that you do or partake in. The concept of personal property and rights have been lost in modern America.

I don’t think that having frustration or recognizing that something is seriously wrong is ‘not having an appreciation of this country and the opportunity it provides.’ I think the exact opposite – that is recognition that such opportunity is seeping away as we chip away at freedoms we are supposed to be secure in.

Thanks. I think the people who have been quick to label me as an anti American type, mostly consider themselves to be “conservative republicans” and moan against their own president the most, much more than me.

 

[eflatminor]

Like I said, naive and ignorant crap.

History proves me right and you wrong. Unlike you I can think about people other than myself. The true sign of someone who is completely ignorant about market economics is that they always reduce entire markets to single people.

We understand. You got nothing. Crystal clear.

Best of luck you to.

LOL

It is impossible to argue someone who is a true believer like yourself. Child labor is a rather straight forward example of how inelastic labor markets can lead to bad results.

Are you denying that?

The problem you have is that you can't talk about market economic because you are either ignorant or know that actually talking about them will expose the problems markets have all on their own even without government.

You are also clearly ignorant about the regressive nature of your own tax policy ideas and you put forth a ridiculous argument about going back to the economies and government policies of 200 years ago and then acted like I had to prove you wrong.

You are no different then those people who have decided the earth is 6000 years old and won't hear anything to the contrary.

Still looking for that example as to how companies can force their will on people without government help...or how a flat tax is regressive...

Is it there? Nope, still nothing.

But tell us again about how people are "willingly forced"!

 

[Bombur]

We understand. You got nothing. Crystal clear.

Best of luck you to.

LOL

It is impossible to argue someone who is a true believer like yourself. Child labor is a rather straight forward example of how inelastic labor markets can lead to bad results.

Are you denying that?

The problem you have is that you can't talk about market economic because you are either ignorant or know that actually talking about them will expose the problems markets have all on their own even without government.

You are also clearly ignorant about the regressive nature of your own tax policy ideas and you put forth a ridiculous argument about going back to the economies and government policies of 200 years ago and then acted like I had to prove you wrong.

You are no different then those people who have decided the earth is 6000 years old and won't hear anything to the contrary.

Still looking for that example as to how companies can force their will on people without government help...or how a flat tax is regressive...

Is it there? Nope, still nothing.

But tell us again about how people are "willingly forced"!

So the point about inelastic demand was lost on you.

I was not prepared for you to be this ignorant of market economics when you put so much faith in it.

Come back when you understand that I already addressed your question multiple times.

As for the "willing forced" quote. I actually didn't say that but I referenced a market situation where someone can find themselves in a desperate situation. A common illustrative example is the person in the desert dying of thirst who would be willing to pay anything for water. The real world example is the labor market where labor can have inelastic demand for wages producing results like child labor, poor working conditions, etc.

 

[eflatminor]

LOL

It is impossible to argue someone who is a true believer like yourself. Child labor is a rather straight forward example of how inelastic labor markets can lead to bad results.

Are you denying that?

The problem you have is that you can't talk about market economic because you are either ignorant or know that actually talking about them will expose the problems markets have all on their own even without government.

You are also clearly ignorant about the regressive nature of your own tax policy ideas and you put forth a ridiculous argument about going back to the economies and government policies of 200 years ago and then acted like I had to prove you wrong.

You are no different then those people who have decided the earth is 6000 years old and won't hear anything to the contrary.

Still looking for that example as to how companies can force their will on people without government help...or how a flat tax is regressive...

Is it there? Nope, still nothing.

But tell us again about how people are "willingly forced"!

So the point about inelastic demand was lost on you.

No, but the idea of forcing anyone to labor being against libertarian ideals is clearly lost on you.

I was not prepared for you to be this ignorant of market economics when you put so much faith in it.

Come back when you understand that I already addressed your question multiple times.

And that example...just one???

Nope, still nothing.

You were saying something about ignorance...

As for the "willing forced" quote. I actually didn't say that but I referenced a market situation where someone can find themselves in a desperate situation. A common illustrative example is the person in the desert dying of thirst who would be willing to pay anything for water. The real world example is the labor market where labor can have inelastic demand for wages producing results like child labor, poor working conditions, etc.

Actually, you did say that.

So you're a liar as well. Shocking.

Now, when you can cite a single example of where libertarian ideals lead to forced child labor, you let us know.

Until then, you still got nothing.

 

[Bombur]

Still looking for that example as to how companies can force their will on people without government help...or how a flat tax is regressive...

Is it there? Nope, still nothing.

But tell us again about how people are "willingly forced"!

So the point about inelastic demand was lost on you.

No, but the idea of forcing anyone to labor being against libertarian ideals is clearly lost on you.

I was not prepared for you to be this ignorant of market economics when you put so much faith in it.

Come back when you understand that I already addressed your question multiple times.

And that example...just one???

Nope, still nothing.

You were saying something about ignorance...

As for the "willing forced" quote. I actually didn't say that but I referenced a market situation where someone can find themselves in a desperate situation. A common illustrative example is the person in the desert dying of thirst who would be willing to pay anything for water. The real world example is the labor market where labor can have inelastic demand for wages producing results like child labor, poor working conditions, etc.

Actually, you did say that.

So you're a liar as well. Shocking.

Now, when you can cite a single example of where libertarian ideals lead to forced child labor, you let us know.

Until then, you still got nothing.

I am sorry I thought we were talking about the reality of what a libertarian world would be like not your idealized made up version of a libertarian world.

Did you think I was going to provide an example of market failure that you would not think was a problem?



The fact is you are too ignorant about market economics to have this discussion. Your politics are based on a moral belief as opposed to an understanding of reality.

 

[hangover]

All these terms sound nice and seem to apply to me: I am a thrifty shopper, I live a conservative lifestyle, I love to see progress every day, I am liberal when it comes to certain things... are these names strictly reserved for political pundits, or can I consider myself all 3? and if I do, will I still be taken seriously on this playing field of politics? please advise...

Progressives will except you, so will liberals, but if you even hint that you have any of those thoughts to a con, you're out. Even Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are considered too "moderate" for the cons, and are being challenged by other cons for their senate seats. These days, if you're not to the right of Mussolini, you're not a true con.

 

[pvsi]

As for the "willing forced" quote. I actually didn't say that but I referenced a market situation where someone can find themselves in a desperate situation. A common illustrative example is the person in the desert dying of thirst who would be willing to pay anything for water. The real world example is the labor market where labor can have inelastic demand for wages producing results like child labor, poor working conditions, etc.

Remember, I am speaking to you not as a republican. in 1987 as a 13 year old me, my father and my mom came to this country with absolutely nothing. And we HAVE been in desperate situations, and that is precisely what I do not want to wish upon anyone, other than perhaps the bankers who created the system in the first place. do not take me for a libertarian, I'm a human being.

BUT YOU HAVE TO LOOK DEEPER INTO THE PROBLEM IF YOU WANT TO SOLVE IT (something I believe GOP and the LP due to their attempt to play the same game, fail to do)

YES, a person dying of thirst in the desert should be helped and not be taken advantage of. But is that as far as we should look, when there may be at least two options: 1. no one is there in the desert with his water fountain stand, because there are not enough customers, or 2. when he sees an occasional victim, he better rip him off good. And that has a lot to do with why I'm not too in love with American system, anyway.......

Deserts are one thing, but as we know there are man made deserts (recessions). I think in America, there is no better example than market crash of 1929, the great depression. and if you want to continue looking short term, then we really are just not speaking the same language, but if you want to understand as I decided to wake up and understand, you have to realize WHY the founding fathers were warning about money lenders years and decades before they finally took it over in 1913, WHY just less than a year after that WW1 started, WHY depression in USA was a good way to get USA into the WW2, and WHY wars are a way to create those deserts, teach kids to keep smiling while a class of billionaires who controls those governments hide in the shadows.

It is IMPOSSIBLE for me to believe that these billionaires would be anything without their full control of the government, but sadly many people are easily bamboozled, when the propaganda plays in stereo (left vs. right circus, MSNBC vs. FOX NEWS etc.)