If Medicare for all is such a slick no brainer

YellowSnow said:

HardlyClothed said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

YellowSnow said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Some things I don't do:

I don't surf in water that I can't see through

I don't fuck around with the DOJ

I don't tell my wife what I really think ... about much of anything

I don't joke about hijacking anything at the airport

I don't argue music, rowboat, history or tall person trivia with Yella hi @YellowSnow

I don't argue the pros and cons of belonging to AARP with @RaceBannon

I don't argue vintage porn trivia with @PurpleThrobber (Christy Canyon damn it!!)

I don't debate the most effective means of pest control with @Swaye,

AND

I don't argue the economis with @UW_Doog_Bot

I just don't!

The synthesis of his economic beliefs is when the government does something it’s socialism. Any market intervetion is the “socialist playbook”. What a fraud.

I'm trying to be balanced here, because I am a default free market person. I do not think that is an accurate description of @UW_Doog_Bot 's political-economic philosophy. The government does some things well, and by "well", I don't mean that there are goods and services that they produce and deliver with any economic efficiency, but rather that they are the actor in the best position to reasonably offer the good or service. But to deny that the government fucks things up on the norm is to be intellectually dishonest. Again, that doesn't mean I don't see a role for the guv. For example, I'm a supporter of public education, but it's as flawed as all get-out. Still, we need it, in my view. I don't think @UW_Doog_Bot is necessarily antagonistic to that view all the way around.

@UW_Doog_Bot is what you call a lower case "L" libertarian as opposed to 2 silver dollar, crack pot Libertarian. Funny enough, my first exposure to 2 silver dollar, crack pot Libertarianism came from one of my parents best fren's who lives about 5 mins down the road from Mr. Bot. The guy's daughter basically runs the home schooling community in the OC.

I'm not even really a lower case libertarian. I believe in too many radical concepts like the EPA, education vouchers, the FED and economic policy, National Parks, the supremacy of federal law guaranteeing civil rights, the universality of human rights and our responsibility to help support them around the world, national borders, etc.

I'm more like the forgotten part of the GOP when they were still into environmentalism but also limited government. Or the forgotten part of the 90's Dems when Bill started crossing the isle maybe? Not sure, I don't really fit too many places easily. Very few economists do. Maybe I can fill out a questionnaire for you and with your superior historical knowledge you can tell me what party of what era I belong to.

I can tell you I'm on opposite axis from communists and fascists!

There is no axis where communists and fascists are on the same side.

Fascism is a relativey young ideology but in every instance it took power, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, and later Pinochet, of central importance was the restoration or preservation of capitalism and the social hierarchies it created from challenges to the left. The avowed socialist Allende was the freely elected president of Chile. How authoritarian.

Again, you default to “big government” is one side of the axis and “free markets” is the other. Total ahistorical bullshit.

Hitler was democratically elected too. People forget this.

UW_Doog_Bot said:

HardlyClothed said:

UW_Doog_Bot said:

YellowSnow said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Some things I don't do:

I don't surf in water that I can't see through

I don't fuck around with the DOJ

I don't tell my wife what I really think ... about much of anything

I don't joke about hijacking anything at the airport

I don't argue music, rowboat, history or tall person trivia with Yella hi @YellowSnow

I don't argue the pros and cons of belonging to AARP with @RaceBannon

I don't argue vintage porn trivia with @PurpleThrobber (Christy Canyon damn it!!)

I don't debate the most effective means of pest control with @Swaye,

AND

I don't argue the economis with @UW_Doog_Bot

I just don't!

The synthesis of his economic beliefs is when the government does something it’s socialism. Any market intervetion is the “socialist playbook”. What a fraud.

I'm trying to be balanced here, because I am a default free market person. I do not think that is an accurate description of @UW_Doog_Bot 's political-economic philosophy. The government does some things well, and by "well", I don't mean that there are goods and services that they produce and deliver with any economic efficiency, but rather that they are the actor in the best position to reasonably offer the good or service. But to deny that the government fucks things up on the norm is to be intellectually dishonest. Again, that doesn't mean I don't see a role for the guv. For example, I'm a supporter of public education, but it's as flawed as all get-out. Still, we need it, in my view. I don't think @UW_Doog_Bot is necessarily antagonistic to that view all the way around.

@UW_Doog_Bot is what you call a lower case "L" libertarian as opposed to 2 silver dollar, crack pot Libertarian. Funny enough, my first exposure to 2 silver dollar, crack pot Libertarianism came from one of my parents best fren's who lives about 5 mins down the road from Mr. Bot. The guy's daughter basically runs the home schooling community in the OC.

I'm not even really a lower case libertarian. I believe in too many radical concepts like the EPA, education vouchers, the FED and economic policy, National Parks, the supremacy of federal law guaranteeing civil rights, the universality of human rights and our responsibility to help support them around the world, national borders, etc.

I'm more like the forgotten part of the GOP when they were still into environmentalism but also limited government. Or the forgotten part of the 90's Dems when Bill started crossing the isle maybe? Not sure, I don't really fit too many places easily. Very few economists do. Maybe I can fill out a questionnaire for you and with your superior historical knowledge you can tell me what party of what era I belong to.

I can tell you I'm on opposite axis from communists and fascists!

There is no axis where communists and fascists are on the same side.

Fascism is a relativey young ideology but in every instance it took power, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, and later Pinochet, of central importance was the restoration or preservation of capitalism and the social hierarchies it created from challenges to the left. The avowed socialist Allende was the freely elected president of Chile. How authoritarian.

Again, you default to “big government” is one side of the axis and “free markets” is the other. Total ahistorical bullshit.

Man, you've gotta somehow be new to politics on the internet to be this ignorant. What if I told you that there's more than one axis of right and left in political ideology?

UW_Doog_Bot said:

creepycoug said:

HardlyClothed said:

creepycoug said:

Some things I don't do:

I don't surf in water that I can't see through

I don't fuck around with the DOJ

I don't tell my wife what I really think ... about much of anything

I don't joke about hijacking anything at the airport

I don't argue music, rowboat, history or tall person trivia with Yella hi @YellowSnow

I don't argue the pros and cons of belonging to AARP with @RaceBannon

I don't argue vintage porn trivia with @PurpleThrobber (Christy Canyon damn it!!)

I don't debate the most effective means of pest control with @Swaye,

AND

I don't argue the economis with @UW_Doog_Bot

I just don't!

The synthesis of his economic beliefs is when the government does something it’s socialism. Any market intervetion is the “socialist playbook”. What a fraud.

I'm trying to be balanced here, because I am a default free market person. I do not think that is an accurate description of @UW_Doog_Bot 's political-economic philosophy. The government does some things well, and by "well", I don't mean that there are goods and services that they produce and deliver with any economic efficiency, but rather that they are the actor in the best position to reasonably offer the good or service. But to deny that the government fucks things up on the norm is to be intellectually dishonest. Again, that doesn't mean I don't see a role for the guv. For example, I'm a supporter of public education, but it's as flawed as all get-out. Still, we need it, in my view. I don't think @UW_Doog_Bot is necessarily antagonistic to that view all the way around.

Point of fact, I'm actually a moderate liberal as the economics spectrum goes(I've even been accused of being a neo-liberal, gasp!). My default preference is freedom and by extension, free markets. That's Radical American thinking I know but I actually do believe in market intervention as well. It can be summed up pretty simply as "If having the government involved can avoid greater negative externalities then government intervention is justified." Of course, within the bounds of the Feds enumerated powers.(Statists don't understand this point at all)

The simplest example is defense, having private armies that can be bought and sold could lead to a coup by the highest bidder. This is a greater negative externality than the inefficiency, corruption, and other negative consequences of central planning. Therefore, government intervention is justified.

Education, the Fed, R&D, Defense, Environment, Finance, Antitrust, Labor laws, even the god damn postal system, there's plenty of intervention I agree with. That doesn't mean that it's efficient, just that there are other factors I consider beyond pure Economics to justify intervention.

Free Markets are more efficient than central planning(which includes both the pure definition of socialism and lesser forms of intervention such as democratic socialism etc.) If you can show me, with empirical evidence, that a central plan is more efficient, or has a significant other non-economic consideration, then you can change my mind. That's part of being dedicated to a science and not an ideology, being able to consider new evidence and change ones mind and beliefs about the nature of the world.