David : Mostly your points are well taken. But no matter how hard I try to come down on Democrats, not only Republicans, you usually --quite often-- take the view that because I say harsh things about the GOP, therefore that is all I have said. I have a Democratic friend who is 180 degrees the opposite and tells me that I must be a Republican because of my criticisms of Democrats. But in both cases what I say is just about the same thing. The concluding "translation" of laissez faire said that Wm Clinton was essentially no different that George W. In other words, all the translations applied about equally to both parties, even if, in some given year, one
deserves more opprobrium than the other. And even if, as a rule, hardly in dispute, there are more free traders / laissez faire types in the GOP. And this has been true for at least 30 years. The whole point was that , on balance, the two parties are just as bad even if their types of evil are somewhat different. As for a few specifics -- Multiculturalism and multinational-ism is Democratic turf. Never mentioned multi-culturalism at all. The point was that multi-nationals don't give a rat's ass about patriotism, are completely willing to sell out the USA to make money, and , as a rule, are run by people with Republican economic views. Multi-culturalists are ( pretty much ) unrelated . Yes, most of them are Democrats, and they have my contempt. But that falls under the heading of Satanic social values. -------------------------------------------------------- There's more support for the open borders BS among the Democrats than the Republicans. But , alas, we did have 8 years of W and a policy toward illegal immigration that was based on a version of laissez faire ideology. We were getting , what ? , about 3 million illegals per year from 2001 to 2008. As you also know, I supported Tancredo on this issue. Don't see where this makes me a leftist Democrat. -------------------------------------------------------- If we were as bent on destroying the environment as the "Chicken Littles" scream, then our pollution output would still be rivaling that of China, if not exceeding it. We actually have come a long way..... Yes we have. But who said anything about global warming ? It wasn't me. I was referring to an almost Republican exclusive, support for strip mining of coal and, more generally, a free pass attitude toward mineral extraction companies who purchase public lands for a song, take out the copper or mica or whatever, and leave a mess that costs the rest of us millions to clean up. This past year I have blasted the Democrats rather regularly about their morals-- and social policies that make my blood boil. I'm just taking some time these days to lash out at economic policies on the Right that make my blood boil for a different set of reasons. W's policy of favoritism shown to coal strip mine companies strikes me as irresponsible in the extreme --to the extent of being criminal. Coal strip mining in most places where it is practiced now, especially Appalachia, is a crime against nature, and against the people of the entire nine state region. The damage it does to the environment is horrendous, irreversible, and covers thousands of square miles. And it became FAR worse in 2001- 2008 than under ANY previous president. My disgust at George W Bush is only a little less than my hatred of Clinton. enough said Billy ============================================ In a message dated 1/6/2010 9:02:53 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes: Some of these are across the political spectrum, such as the Chinese borrowing, which while Bush was no slouch, Obama is the one setting records, despite complaining about the excesses of Bush while he was a Senator. Hey Obama, hypocrite much?? And the give away to the Wall Street bankers is turning out to be equally bipartisan. Throw in GM and Chrysler, and one might even think that the Democrats have a clear edge. There's more support for the open borders BS among the Democrats than the Republicans. Texas is one of the most Republican states in the country, and we damn sure don't agree with what is written below. If we were as bent on destroying the environment as the "Chicken Littles" scream, then our pollution output would still be rivaling that of China, if not exceeding it. We actually have come a long way, but not according to those who would destroy the economy for fraudulent "science." "Globull Warming" is definitely one area where the rules and the referees have been bought and sold, even on an international level. And since CO2 is now an EPA sanctioned pollutant, we need to stop exhaling. Congress and this administration can lead by example on that one. There's some rules and regulations right there. Just don't try to call them good. Insane referees don't help anybody. With the presence of the "Religious right," one should hardly sally forth with the lame expectation of ethics in fallen humanity without some rules and referees. But voting for George W. Bush is, of course, the crowning blow. Are you coming down with Bush Derangement Syndrome? The shipping of American Jobs overseas is another thing that Obama campaigned to stop. That promise also had an expiration date, apparently, because I've seen NOTHING from this administration on that front. Yet all of this economic insanity is Republican. Oh really now?? Overly simplistic binary thinking coupled with left stream media stereotypes. Pollyanna-ish view of the "referees," who are no less fallen than those that they are regulating, and they appear to be even MORE incompetent. See EPA, Homeland Insecurity, FEMA, more czars than Russia, Tax Cheat at Treasury (boss of the IRS (HA!!)), etc, et al, ad nauseum. This administration IS the clown car. Except that it's not funny. And we want them to issue even more rules and regulations to screw things up?? Now THAT is INSANE. David _ "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz On 1/6/2010 9:36 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: That's why I said "good rules and good regulations." Regulations can be independent of parties, or created by any party, both Bushes engineered a good number. But I was mostly thinking about Teddy Roosevelt. Or Eisenhower, or FDR. You must realize that Barney Frank, as far as I am concerned, is the son of Satan. He has nothing to do with "socialism." He has everything to do with EVIL. Anyway, the point is that laissez faire is a French phrase. It can be translated in several ways -- give away the store and get almost nothing in return ship American jobs overseas as fast as possible borrow as many trillions of dollars from the Chinese as they will lend give Wall Street bankers all they want and they will shaft everyone else open the border to every Mexican with two legs its fun to hollow out the US economy destroy the environment and pass along the costs to the citizens make the world safe for cartels and monopolies drive wages lower through all available means impoverish the middle class for the sake of the county club set multi-national anti-patriotism is good for business pretend that in the absence of rules and referees, men will be ethical pretend that in the absence of rules and referees, women will be ethical trust in the market to do all things is to trust in delusions vote for George W Bush My opinion of the matter. Unfortunately there is one last translation to report-- William Clinton was approximately just as bad as George Jr Laissez faire is suicidal We can do a helluva lot better than that and we had better do so. Billy ------------------------------------------------------------- In a message dated 1/6/2010 7:10:15 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: Sadly, the referees are no better than the players. Freddie and Fannie, the quasi-government agencies behind most (all?) of the bad housing loans have been given a virtual blank check by the government that should be regulating them, not enabling them. But they will continue to be enabled as long as Barney Frank's lover is still a high ranking official in these institutions. It wasn't DEREGULATION that led to Freddie and Fannie and their implosion, it was NO REGULATION IN THE FIRST PLACE. And McCain pushed for regulation of them only to have it voted down BY DEMOCRATS, yet Republicans have insane economic views. Sorry, I think that Socialism is an insane economic view, and it's not Republican. David _ "Free speech is meant to protect unpopular speech. Popular speech, by definition, needs no protection."—Neal Boortz On 1/6/2010 1:54 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) wrote: Ernie : The problem, IMHO, is a flawed theory that won't go away, laissez faire economics. While it is impossible for me to be a Democrat because of the party's social issues positions ( most of which are Satanic ), I can never be a Republican because the GOP is the party of insane economic views. Why have business leaders called the shots for 30 years ? The undeserved popularity of laissez faire theory. The current recession has had a sobering-up effect and it has again become possible to see the structural problems in unregulated Capitalism. Dammit. When will they learn ? You can't have a football game without rules and referees. And if you want a good football game you had better have good rules and good referees. It is, when all is said, that simple. Billy =========================================== In a message dated 1/6/2010 10:04:27 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: I may not like this trend, but I suspect they are correct that there will be more opportunities to make an impact on society (and the economy) via politics than entrepreneurship, as least relative to the last three decades. As a Radical Centrist, I am fascinated by such cyclical pendulum swings, as (like Newton before me :-) they seem to hint at some larger underlying dynamic: _http://current.com/items/90598372_genius-one-percent-inspiration-99-percent -grit.htm_ (http://current.com/items/90598372_genius-one-percent-inspiration-99-percent-grit.htm) If we could figure out the higher-order mechanic that makes the pendulum swing back and forth, perhaps we could escape both the cycles and partisan bickering between socialism and capitalism. Hey, one can dream... -- Ernie P. _http://bit.ly/7KbWwS_ (http://bit.ly/7KbWwS) In Pareto’s view, power rotates among different groups of elites. Overlooked in recent years, Pareto’s “circulation of elites†theory may be about to make a comeback. For the past 30 years, business leaders have essentially called the shots, proclaiming markets, deregulation, and globalization as their mantras. Global capitalism has triumphed at the expense of national governments. The world of business has attracted the brightest talent and offered the most attractive careers and compensation. The next few years will likely witness the return of the politician and the advent of a larger role for the state in the economy. Barack Obama, Angela Merkel, and Nicolas Sarkozy have shoved business titans off the front page. Politicians are now the ones in the driver’s seat.= _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at _http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:Centroids @radicalcentrism.com) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at _http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at _http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) _http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com_ (http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com) Archives at _http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/_ (http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/) _______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
_______________________________________________ Centroids mailing list: [email protected] http://radicalcentrism.com/mailman/listinfo/centroids_radicalcentrism.com Archives at http://radicalcentrism.org/pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/
