Right Wing Warning???

[elvis]

i dont know their names, and thats not important, so i wont bother to waste my time looking them up for you
i already know you will deflect or ignore it anyway
i already have you figured out

Hmmm...you don't know their names, it's "not important," and you won't bother looking them up?

But I'm "deflecting" and "ignoring"? Makes sense!

typical obamabot

 

[Agnapostate]

Now if I felt that I had won such a debate and that such was necessary to buttress a point, I would have linked to that debate, where anyone interested could readily read the record; thus demonstrating the point... where YOU on the other hand chose to merely allude to the notion; this a function of buttressing your fantasy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1159062-post480.html

Your inability to offer a response was unsurprising. After having exposed your blatant ignorance of rudimentary concepts of political economy, it was only natural that your efforts would need to be utilized to maintain your mendacious claims elsewhere. l:

typical obamabot

Amusing. As a socialist, Obama's liberal democratic capitalism represents a greater obstacle to me than the more rightist Anglo-Saxon capitalism favored by U.S. conservatives because of its ability to fine-tune efficiency in some areas and appease worker militancy, thus maintaining the stability of the capitalist economic system. Anglo-Saxon capitalism, if intensified to a sufficient degree, would result in the collapse of that economic system and a likely turn to radicalism and a massive shift in property rights. So I'm all for a rightist victory; they're the greatest allies that socialist have!

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Now if I felt that I had won such a debate and that such was necessary to buttress a point, I would have linked to that debate, where anyone interested could readily read the record; thus demonstrating the point... where YOU on the other hand chose to merely allude to the notion; this a function of buttressing your fantasy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1159062-post480.html

Your inability to offer a response was unsurprising. After having exposed your blatant ignorance of rudimentary concepts of political economy, it was only natural that your efforts would need to be utilized to maintain your mendacious claims elsewhere. l:

ROFL...

Well that's what I suspected... you offered a position and when it wasn't contested, by virtue of the simple fact that it wasn't read, you erroneously concluded that the position was superior; and superior to the extent that you concluded that the opposition could not even mount a contest...

thank you for sharing, as it was HYSTERICAL... the purest essence of the common fool.

BRAVO BRAVO!


But here's the thing...

Facism is purely, wholly, solely, utterly, thoroughly and without exception a function of the ideological left... European fascism is American Progressivism... which is to say the US Progressive is the ideological equivilent to the European facist. The ONLY THING that separates the Fascist from the socialist is the "nationalist' bent which fascism (Progressivism) utilizes... where the Socialist rejects national sovereignty focusing it's loyalty upon Socialism itself.

typical obamabot

Amusing. As a socialist, Obama's liberal democratic capitalism represents a greater obstacle to me than the more rightist Anglo-Saxon capitalism favored by U.S. conservatives because of its ability to fine-tune efficiency in some areas and appease worker militancy, thus maintaining the stability of the capitalist economic system. Anglo-Saxon capitalism, if intensified to a sufficient degree, would result in the collapse of that economic system and a likely turn to radicalism and a massive shift in property rights. So I'm all for a rightist victory; they're the greatest allies that socialist have!

ROFLMNAO... Capitalism is merely the natural order... to even believe that it CAN fail, forces one to redefine FAILURE...

Nature requires balance; thus all things in nature ebb and flow from and to a state of balance.

The left wants to demand that 'failure' is defined by the state of ebb... where excesses have realized an unsustainable value and due to nature's requirement of balance economies which engaged in excess return to the point of balance...

The leftists thus feel that to spare the pain born of an ebbing economy, their solution is to maintain economy in an ethereal constant state of inadequacy... which is absurd because such will only feed the natural desire of the individual to excell beyond that state of inadequacy, promoting revolution, generating an imbalance and BAM... an ebbing fall back to balance; causing vastly MORE suffering through the UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES of failed leftist policy, than would otherwise have occurred.

This global meltdown that we're currently experiencing is a direct result of leftist manipulation of the financial markets, it is being EXTENDED due to leftist manaipulation of those markets and the PAID AND SUFFERING IS BEING INTENSIFIED by the leftist policies which CREATED THE PAIN TO BEGIN WITH.

... but that was a great "TRY" comrade... ya FAILED... but 'lose' is what LOSERS DO... now isn't it?

Ya did the BEST ya could Godbless ya.

 

[elvis]

Now if I felt that I had won such a debate and that such was necessary to buttress a point, I would have linked to that debate, where anyone interested could readily read the record; thus demonstrating the point... where YOU on the other hand chose to merely allude to the notion; this a function of buttressing your fantasy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1159062-post480.html

Your inability to offer a response was unsurprising. After having exposed your blatant ignorance of rudimentary concepts of political economy, it was only natural that your efforts would need to be utilized to maintain your mendacious claims elsewhere. l:

typical obamabot

Amusing. As a socialist, Obama's liberal democratic capitalism represents a greater obstacle to me than the more rightist Anglo-Saxon capitalism favored by U.S. conservatives because of its ability to fine-tune efficiency in some areas and appease worker militancy, thus maintaining the stability of the capitalist economic system. Anglo-Saxon capitalism, if intensified to a sufficient degree, would result in the collapse of that economic system and a likely turn to radicalism and a massive shift in property rights. So I'm all for a rightist victory; they're the greatest allies that socialist have!

Anglo-saxon? what does that have to do with anything?

 

[Agnapostate]

Well that's what I suspected... you offered a position and when it wasn't contested, by virtue of the simple fact that it wasn't read, you erroneously concluded that the position was superior; and superior to the extent that you concluded that the opposition could not even mount a contest...

Such an assumption did not even need to be made. Your prior inadequacies already indicated your woeful incompetence, and accordingly, I expected that you would be unable to provide a sufficient response. You legitimize these expectations with drivel such as this:

Facism is purely, wholly, solely, utterly, thoroughly and without exception a function of the ideological left... European fascism is American Progressivism... which is to say the US Progressive is the ideological equivilent to the European facist. The ONLY THING that separates the Fascist from the socialist is the "nationalist' bent which fascism (Progressivism) utilizes... where the Socialist rejects national sovereignty focusing it's loyalty upon Socialism itself.

If you can refrain from plagiarizing Jonah Goldberg for a minute, you should note that you've now corrupted your originally inaccurate definition of fascism even further by making comparisons to liberal democratic capitalism. There are flagrantly obvious divergences between fascism, socialism, and liberal democratic capitalism; it is only the imbecile who is ignorant of political economy who will attempt to conflate them in such an egregiously inaccurate manner.

ROFLMNAO... Capitalism is merely the natural order... to even believe that it CAN fail, forces one to redefine FAILURE...

That's not the case, I'm afraid! The greatest failure of capitalism is embedded in the inefficient labor market that it promotes, which is plagued by the twin problems of influence and agency costs, those caused by the prevalence of information asymmetries between economic agents, resulting in the agency problems of adverse selection and moral hazard, just to illustrate an example. We can then consider the paradox of inefficiency in the capitalist labor market. We can first refer to the analysis of Carl Shapiro and Joseph Stiglitz in Equilibrium Unemployment as a Worker Discipline Device.

To induce its workers not to shirk, the firm attempts to pay more than the going wage; then, if a worker is caught shirking and is fired, he will pay a penalty. If it pays one firm to raise its wage, however, it will pay all firms to raise their wages. When they all raise their wages, the incentive not to shirk again disappears. But as all firms raise their wages, their demand for labor increases, and unemplyoment results. With unemployment, even if all firms pay the same wages, a worker has an incentive not to shirk. For, if he is fired, an individual will not immediately obtain another job. The equilibrium unemployment rate must be sufficiently high that it pays workers to work rather than to take the risk of being caught shirking.

Are you aware of the problem that this causes? First, note that involuntary unemployment is a wasted resource, and thus an inefficiency. Therefore, if the equilibrium unemployment rate is high, this will result in external inefficiency in the labor market. However, if it is too low, then workers will no longer have an incentive not to shirk, thereby causing shirking, and accordingly internal inefficiency in the labor market. Hence, internal inefficiency is a necessary condition of external efficiency, and more critically, external inefficiency is a necessary condition of internal efficiency.

(off topic blathering snip'd)

This global meltdown that we're currently experiencing is a direct result of leftist manipulation of the financial markets, it is being EXTENDED due to leftist manaipulation of those markets and the PAID AND SUFFERING IS BEING INTENSIFIED by the leftist policies which CREATED THE PAIN TO BEGIN WITH.

All existing capitalist markets are reliant on economic planning. Were this not so, they would immediately collapse, inasmuch as governmental economic planning is a necessary element of capitalism; it acts as a facilitator and a stabilizing agent in the capitalist economy, a role that other entities are incapable of assuming. It is thus socialism and democratic worker-owned enterprises that ensure legitimate market competition. As astutely noted by Jaroslav Vanek, "the capitalist economy is not a true market economy because in western capitalism, as in Soviet state capitalism, there is a tendency towards monopoly. Economic democracy tends toward a competitive market."

... but that was a great "TRY" comrade... ya FAILED... but 'lose' is what LOSERS DO... now isn't it?

Ya did the BEST ya could Godbless ya.

For all your condemnations of leftists, I have a feeling you would have felt at home amongst those partaking of hallucinogenic substances in the 1960's.

 

[Agnapostate]

Anglo-saxon? what does that have to do with anything?

Anglo-Saxon capitalism is the traditional "rightist" form, as opposed to more "centrist" variety of liberal democratic capitalism and the "leftist" variety of social democratic capitalism. The standard rightist approach consists of claiming that liberal democratic and social democratic capitalism are in fact forms of "socialism," which is obviously a reckless abuse of political economy.

 

[DiveCon]

Now if I felt that I had won such a debate and that such was necessary to buttress a point, I would have linked to that debate, where anyone interested could readily read the record; thus demonstrating the point... where YOU on the other hand chose to merely allude to the notion; this a function of buttressing your fantasy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1159062-post480.html

Your inability to offer a response was unsurprising. After having exposed your blatant ignorance of rudimentary concepts of political economy, it was only natural that your efforts would need to be utilized to maintain your mendacious claims elsewhere. l:

typical obamabot

Amusing. As a socialist, Obama's liberal democratic capitalism represents a greater obstacle to me than the more rightist Anglo-Saxon capitalism favored by U.S. conservatives because of its ability to fine-tune efficiency in some areas and appease worker militancy, thus maintaining the stability of the capitalist economic system. Anglo-Saxon capitalism, if intensified to a sufficient degree, would result in the collapse of that economic system and a likely turn to radicalism and a massive shift in property rights. So I'm all for a rightist victory; they're the greatest allies that socialist have!

Anglo-saxon? what does that have to do with anything?

coming from a moron like him, i doubt HE even knows

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Now if I felt that I had won such a debate and that such was necessary to buttress a point, I would have linked to that debate, where anyone interested could readily read the record; thus demonstrating the point... where YOU on the other hand chose to merely allude to the notion; this a function of buttressing your fantasy.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1159062-post480.html

Your inability to offer a response was unsurprising. After having exposed your blatant ignorance of rudimentary concepts of political economy, it was only natural that your efforts would need to be utilized to maintain your mendacious claims elsewhere. l:

typical obamabot

Amusing. As a socialist, Obama's liberal democratic capitalism represents a greater obstacle to me than the more rightist Anglo-Saxon capitalism favored by U.S. conservatives because of its ability to fine-tune efficiency in some areas and appease worker militancy, thus maintaining the stability of the capitalist economic system. Anglo-Saxon capitalism, if intensified to a sufficient degree, would result in the collapse of that economic system and a likely turn to radicalism and a massive shift in property rights. So I'm all for a rightist victory; they're the greatest allies that socialist have!

Anglo-saxon? what does that have to do with anything?

Oh, it's probably another psuedonym of Ag-whats-her-name... at best it's another Central or south American communist... a sychophant of the Che, Fidel and more recently Hugo...

 

[Agnapostate]

coming from a moron like him, i doubt HE even knows

Don't make me laugh; I've provided a clear and frank definition of the distinctions between Anglo-Saxon capitalism and the liberal and social democratic forms, the third being a form of leftist "Rhine capitalism." Conversely, I doubt you could even offer me a sufficient explanation of Pareto optimality.

 

[DiveCon]

coming from a moron like him, i doubt HE even knows

Don't make me laugh; I've provided a clear and frank definition of the distinctions between Anglo-Saxon capitalism and the liberal and social democratic forms, the third being a form of leftist "Rhine capitalism." Conversely, I doubt you could even offer me a sufficient explanation of Pareto optimality.

ah, so your an intellectual moron
that explains a lot

 

[Agnapostate]

ah, so your an intellectual moron
that explains a lot

And you're apparently an ignorant moron. That explains far more.

 

[DiveCon]

ah, so your an intellectual moron
that explains a lot

And you're apparently an ignorant moron. That explains far more.

you just think you know more than someone else because of your education or the line of work your in
but that doesnt make you any less of a fucking asshole, see, you can still be smart and be a moron
you are too fucking arrogant for your own good

 

[Agnapostate]

you just think you know more than someone else because of your education or the line of work your in
but that doesnt make you any less of a fucking asshole, see, you can still be smart and be a moron
you are too fucking arrogant for your own good

I don't need to be arrogant in debates with anti-socialists. Their defeat certainly doesn't mean that I adopt an "it's cuz of me" line. It's because socialists generally have a grasp of political economy, whereas anti-socialists, unfortunately, do not.

And of course I've said nothing here that you couldn't understand if you wanted to.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1159062-post480.html

Your inability to offer a response was unsurprising. After having exposed your blatant ignorance of rudimentary concepts of political economy, it was only natural that your efforts would need to be utilized to maintain your mendacious claims elsewhere. l:



Amusing. As a socialist, Obama's liberal democratic capitalism represents a greater obstacle to me than the more rightist Anglo-Saxon capitalism favored by U.S. conservatives because of its ability to fine-tune efficiency in some areas and appease worker militancy, thus maintaining the stability of the capitalist economic system. Anglo-Saxon capitalism, if intensified to a sufficient degree, would result in the collapse of that economic system and a likely turn to radicalism and a massive shift in property rights. So I'm all for a rightist victory; they're the greatest allies that socialist have!

Anglo-saxon? what does that have to do with anything?

Oh, it's probably another psuedonym of Ag-whats-her-name... at best it's another Central or south American communist... a sychophant of the Che, Fidel and more recently Hugo...

Ravi would liked to have offered a well reasoned, logically valid, intellectually sound response to this, but being that she lacks the intellectual means to do so, she was relegated to offering up a flaccid retort, born of her importent leftist rage, wherein she lamented the feminized nature of leftist males... projecting my observation of such as representing a hatred of woman; of course she was unable to state a reasoned basis for such... but that is after all the nature of the irrational, now isn't it?

 

[DiveCon]

Don't make me laugh; I've provided a clear and frank definition of the distinctions between Anglo-Saxon capitalism and the liberal and social democratic forms, the third being a form of leftist "Rhine capitalism." Conversely, I doubt you could even offer me a sufficient explanation of Pareto optimality.

I don't need to be arrogant in debates with anti-socialists. Their defeat certainly doesn't mean that I adopt an "it's cuz of me" line. It's because socialists generally have a grasp of political economy, whereas anti-socialists, unfortunately, do not.

And of course I've said nothing here that you couldn't understand if you wanted to.

the first post is an example of you attempting to put yourself above others
its quite transparent

 

[Agnapostate]

Ravi would liked to have offered a well reasoned, logically valid, intellectually sound response to this, but being that she lacks the intellectual means to do so, she was relegated to offering up a flaccid retort, born of her importent leftist rage, wherein she lamented the feminized nature of leftist males... projecting my observation of such as representing a hatred of woman; of course she was unable to state a reasoned basis for such... but that is after all the nature of the irrational, now isn't it?

If you're about done with your incoherent rambling, I believe you have some homework to do, isn't that right?

the first post is an example of you attempting to put yourself above others
its quite transparent

That was mentioned after toy claimed that I was a moron and didn't know what I was talking about. It cried out for rebuttal.

 

[DiveCon]

Ravi would liked to have offered a well reasoned, logically valid, intellectually sound response to this, but being that she lacks the intellectual means to do so, she was relegated to offering up a flaccid retort, born of her importent leftist rage, wherein she lamented the feminized nature of leftist males... projecting my observation of such as representing a hatred of woman; of course she was unable to state a reasoned basis for such... but that is after all the nature of the irrational, now isn't it?

If you're about done with your incoherent rambling, I believe you have some homework to do, isn't that right?

the first post is an example of you attempting to put yourself above others
its quite transparent

That was mentioned after toy claimed that I was a moron and didn't know what I was talking about. It cried out for rebuttal.

ah, so you were offended by being called a moron, so you had to then prove you were an asshole instead, i get it
i'll be sure and not make that mistake again in the future

 

[Agnapostate]

ah, so you were offended by being called a moron, so you had to then prove you were an asshole instead, i get it
i'll be sure and not make that mistake again in the future

From what I've seen thus far, avoidance of mistakes doesn't seem to be your top skill.

 

[DiveCon]

ah, so you were offended by being called a moron, so you had to then prove you were an asshole instead, i get it
i'll be sure and not make that mistake again in the future

From what I've seen thus far, avoidance of mistakes doesn't seem to be your top skill.

nor your's

 

[Agnapostate]

Whoa...pretty ingenious rebuttal there!