Zappa.com

The Official Frank Zappa Messageboards
It is currently Fri Oct 24, 2014 4:53 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2742 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 ... 110  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 1:33 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Not enough Milton Friedman by Paul Krugman for you, DB?

Here's a long article on Friedman by Paul Krugman in which he states that Friedman's reaction to Keynes was entirely appropriate. It contains criticism but also a great deal of praise and ends with the words...

"In the long run, great men are remembered for their strengths, not their weaknesses, and Milton Friedman was a very great man indeed—a man of intellectual courage who was one of the most important economic thinkers of all time, and possibly the most brilliant communicator of economic ideas to the general public that ever lived. But there’s a good case for arguing that Friedmanism, in the end, went too far, both as a doctrine and in its practical applications. When Friedman was beginning his career as a public intellectual, the times were ripe for a counterreformation against Keynesianism and all that went with it. But what the world needs now, I’d argue, is a counter-counterreformation."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archive ... tion=false

BTW The first "Keynesian" in your video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N25vJG1u6zE) is Ben Bernanke who, although disliked by some monetarists, gave a speech on Friedman's 90th birthday...

"I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer. His seminal contributions to economics are legion, including his development of the permanent-income theory of consumer spending, his paradigm-shifting research in monetary economics, and his stimulating and original essays on economic history and methodology. Generations of graduate students, at the University of Chicago and elsewhere, have benefited from his insight; and many of these intellectual children and grandchildren continue to this day to extend the sway of Friedman's ideas in economics. What is more, Milton Friedman's influence on broader public opinion, exercised through his popular writings, speaking, and television appearances, has been at least as important and enduring as his impact on academic thought. In his humane and engaging way, Milton Friedman has conveyed to millions an understanding of the economic benefits of free, competitive markets, as well as the close connection that economic freedoms such as property rights and freedom of contract bear to other types of liberty."

He then goes on to give a view of the Great Depression that entirely coincides with your own as well as Milton Friedman's, ending with the words...

"Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

Best wishes for your next ninety years."

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS ... efault.htm

I can't say I like Ben Bernanke much,either.

Hey, we agree again!

The second "Keynesian" is Paul Krugman (again), who we both don't like.

Once again, agreement!

The third "Keynesian" is Art Laffer, who has come out with "Keynesian" statements like: "in country after country, increased government spending acted more like a depressant than a stimulant.”

And the claim (considering their size and the anti-Keynesianist stance of Estonia pretty unlikely IMO) that...

“The four nations—Estonia, Ireland, the Slovak Republic and Finland—with the biggest stimulus programs had the steepest declines in growth.”

http://marketmonetarist.com/2012/08/06/ ... -yourself/

I don't like him, either.

We agree again!

The fourth "Keynesian" is "Tom". I don't know his second name. But he looks like a dickhead. So fuck him.

Agree, agree, agree!

I must admit, I stopped watching after "Tom" as the sound bites got so minimal that I thought the context was lost.



(Sorry Downer Mydnyte :oops:)

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 8:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3609
Location: Vancouver, BC
Caputh wrote:
Not enough Milton Friedman by Paul Krugman for you, DB?

Here's a long article on Friedman by Paul Krugman in which he states that Friedman's reaction to Keynes was entirely appropriate. It contains criticism but also a great deal of praise and ends with the words...

"In the long run, great men are remembered for their strengths, not their weaknesses, and Milton Friedman was a very great man indeed—a man of intellectual courage who was one of the most important economic thinkers of all time, and possibly the most brilliant communicator of economic ideas to the general public that ever lived. But there’s a good case for arguing that Friedmanism, in the end, went too far, both as a doctrine and in its practical applications. When Friedman was beginning his career as a public intellectual, the times were ripe for a counterreformation against Keynesianism and all that went with it. But what the world needs now, I’d argue, is a counter-counterreformation."
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archive ... tion=false

BTW The first "Keynesian" in your video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N25vJG1u6zE) is Ben Bernanke who, although disliked by some monetarists, gave a speech on Friedman's 90th birthday...

"I can think of no greater honor than being invited to speak on the occasion of Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday. Among economic scholars, Friedman has no peer. His seminal contributions to economics are legion, including his development of the permanent-income theory of consumer spending, his paradigm-shifting research in monetary economics, and his stimulating and original essays on economic history and methodology. Generations of graduate students, at the University of Chicago and elsewhere, have benefited from his insight; and many of these intellectual children and grandchildren continue to this day to extend the sway of Friedman's ideas in economics. What is more, Milton Friedman's influence on broader public opinion, exercised through his popular writings, speaking, and television appearances, has been at least as important and enduring as his impact on academic thought. In his humane and engaging way, Milton Friedman has conveyed to millions an understanding of the economic benefits of free, competitive markets, as well as the close connection that economic freedoms such as property rights and freedom of contract bear to other types of liberty."

He then goes on to give a view of the Great Depression that entirely coincides with your own as well as Milton Friedman's, ending with the words...

"Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again.

Best wishes for your next ninety years."

http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS ... efault.htm

I can't say I like Ben Bernanke much,either.

Hey, we agree again!

The second "Keynesian" is Paul Krugman (again), who we both don't like.

Once again, agreement!

The third "Keynesian" is Art Laffer, who has come out with "Keynesian" statements like: "in country after country, increased government spending acted more like a depressant than a stimulant.”

And the claim (considering their size and the anti-Keynesianist stance of Estonia pretty unlikely IMO) that...

“The four nations—Estonia, Ireland, the Slovak Republic and Finland—with the biggest stimulus programs had the steepest declines in growth.”

http://marketmonetarist.com/2012/08/06/ ... -yourself/

I don't like him, either.

We agree again!

The fourth "Keynesian" is "Tom". I don't know his second name. But he looks like a dickhead. So fuck him.

Agree, agree, agree!

I must admit, I stopped watching after "Tom" as the sound bites got so minimal that I thought the context was lost.



(Sorry Downer Mydnyte :oops:)


The above PROVES my points. Firstly, that not only is Krugman a total hypocrite, but that he has NO credibility. And secondly, how Keynesians still think they're right, despite the FACT they aren't...


...but yeah, I guess you agree with me. :?

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5775
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Um....where else did I see this exact same word for word conversation online?......

...oh yeah... over here... http://hiphoplibertarians.blogspot.com/


here's a clue

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 9:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Oh, I'm Isaac too? :wink:

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 19, 2013 10:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:27 pm
Posts: 5775
Location: echoing through the canyons of your mind
Caputh wrote:
Oh, I'm Isaac too? :wink:



Half of the conversation anyways...besides.....you don't want to be "that guy". :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Disco Boy wrote:

...but yeah, I guess you agree with me. :?


The only difference being that I think they're "Keynesians" as they adore Friedman and you think they're Keynesians for only pretending to adore Friedman. :wink:

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3609
Location: Vancouver, BC
tweedle-dumb wrote:
Um....where else did I see this exact same word for word conversation online?......

...oh yeah... over here... http://hiphoplibertarians.blogspot.com/


here's a clue

Image


Those are NOT comparable as word for word conversations.

And STFU already. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
...but yeah, I guess you agree with me. :?


The only difference being that I think they're "Keynesians" as they adore Friedman and you think they're Keynesians for only pretending to adore Friedman. :wink:


No.

Friedman comes from the Austrian & Chicago School of Economics and Krugman comes from Keynesians Economics - the latter is a radically different school of thought than the formers. And like I said, Krugman, like other Keynesians, have respect for Friedman...but they certainly don't agree with the majority of his teachings. If they did, they wouldn't be Keynesians... :roll:

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 20, 2013 10:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Disco Boy wrote:
If they did, they wouldn't be Keynesians... :roll:

Ah, that is exactly what I was suggesting. Agree,agree, agree.

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:21 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 8:37 pm
Posts: 339
Caputh wrote:
Oh, I'm Isaac too? :wink:

No, I'm Spacebro :)

_________________
Banned
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/banned


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:56 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 10:35 am
Posts: 507
Little_Sally wrote:
Caputh wrote:
Oh, I'm Isaac too? :wink:

No, I'm Spacebro :)

"No, I'm Brian of Nazareth!!"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 10:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
tiboudre wrote:
Little_Sally wrote:
Caputh wrote:
Oh, I'm Isaac too? :wink:

No, I'm Spacebro :)

"No, I'm Brian of Nazareth!!"

"No, I'm Spartacus!"

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 7:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3609
Location: Vancouver, BC
Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
If they did, they wouldn't be Keynesians... :roll:

Ah, that is exactly what I was suggesting. Agree,agree, agree.


I guess so... :?

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 21, 2013 9:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:58 pm
Posts: 13142
Location: Home of The Mondavi Center.
Disco Boy wrote:
Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
If they did, they wouldn't be Keynesians... :roll:

Ah, that is exactly what I was suggesting. Agree,agree, agree.


I guess so... :?

Confused that someone agrees with you DB? Is it that surprising......or are you that paranoid? You shouldn't be, since you've been here I don't think you've been wrong.....EVER! :wink:
Who got the biggest balls of us all.......DB dat who! :mrgreen:

_________________
I'm getting larger as I walk away.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20736
Location: Somewhere in time
They look good mounted on Poly's wall too... :smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3609
Location: Vancouver, BC
KAPT.KIIRK wrote:
Confused that someone agrees with you DB? Is it that surprising......or are you that paranoid?


No, I'm not paranoid. And I'm confused not only because he apparently agreed with me regarding some Keynesian shortcomings but also because I think he started out disagreeing with me... :?

KAPT.KIIRK wrote:
You shouldn't be, since you've been here I don't think you've been wrong.....EVER! :wink:
Who got the biggest balls of us all.......DB dat who! :mrgreen:


Well, I'm glad someone can admit that. :mrgreen:

tweedle-dee wrote:
They look good mounted on Poly's wall too... :smoke:


The only thing mounted on polydigm's wall are his owned balls... :roll:

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 3:08 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Disco Boy wrote:
No, I'm not paranoid. And I'm confused not only because he apparently agreed with me regarding some Keynesian shortcomings but also because I think he started out disagreeing with me... :?


Ah. Here I have to disagree, I'm afraid. The point I have been making all along that appears to confuse you somewhat is that you have yet to produce a "Keynesian" (note inverted commas) that I would regard conforms with Keynesian thought as I see it.

Perhaps an analogy will help.
You have repeatedly stated that Rand Paul's platform is entirely different from his father's even though he himself has said he supports his father's ideas and that his father would be his first choice for president. Your main beef against him appears to be that, fairly late in the race, he endorsed Mitt Romney. Fair enough, if that's your position.

By the same token, through endorsing Milton Friedman, the "Keynesians" (note inverted commas) you quoted above, make them the kind of "Keynesians" (note inverted commas again), who in no way reflect my view of what Keynes himself truly intended.

In addition, you have also repeatedly stated that Ron Paul is not a Republican, even though he is a member of the party and attempted to become their presidential candidate. Politicians (and academics and media personalities) would therefore seem to receive or take on designations that are not universally accepted by all.

If I were to take Glenn Beck, who describes himself as a Libertarian, and say his opinions mirror your views or Ron Paul's to a 100%, I think you would reject the suggestion, too and rightly.

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 5:02 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 8:52 pm
Posts: 1845
Why can't we talk about female orgasm for a while?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:48 pm
Posts: 20736
Location: Somewhere in time
Wrong thread, but it reminds me that when I was in High School I got a book at the Librairy called The Female Orgasim...it was huge weighed a ton and was probably 500 pages...lol...like a text book...you could put everything you need to know about the male orgasim on a business card...lol... :mrgreen:

:smoke:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 7:37 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
I'm quite prepared to talk about the female orgasm, but haven't physically experienced one myself in my own body.

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 1:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:58 pm
Posts: 13142
Location: Home of The Mondavi Center.
Plook wrote:
Wrong thread, but it reminds me that when I was in High School I got a book at the Librairy called The Female Orgasim...it was huge weighed a ton and was probably 500 pages...lol...like a text book...

Most likely caused by multi big 'n heavy orgasms each time,instead of one big quicky like ours. :mrgreen:

_________________
I'm getting larger as I walk away.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 8:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3609
Location: Vancouver, BC
Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
No, I'm not paranoid. And I'm confused not only because he apparently agreed with me regarding some Keynesian shortcomings but also because I think he started out disagreeing with me... :?


Ah. Here I have to disagree, I'm afraid. The point I have been making all along that appears to confuse you somewhat is that you have yet to produce a "Keynesian" (note inverted commas) that I would regard conforms with Keynesian thought as I see it.


No, I have produced Keynesians that conform to Keynesian thought. It's just that you are desperately trying to blur the lines, like you ALWAYS do, and make it seem like that's not the case, despite the FACT it is, since not every economist agrees with each other regarding every policy/philosophy. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
Perhaps an analogy will help.
You have repeatedly stated that Rand Paul's platform is entirely different from his father's even though he himself has said he supports his father's ideas and that his father would be his first choice for president. Your main beef against him appears to be that, fairly late in the race, he endorsed Mitt Romney. Fair enough, if that's your position.


You're blurring the lines again. That's NOT what he or I said. I said Rand Paul's platform differs from Ron Paul's platform. I NEVER said they were entirely different platforms. While Rand and Ron agree on most things...they don't agree on all things. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
By the same token, through endorsing Milton Friedman, the "Keynesians" (note inverted commas) you quoted above, make them the kind of "Keynesians" (note inverted commas again), who in no way reflect my view of what Keynes himself truly intended.


Once again, Keynesians do NOT endorse ALL of Friedman's policies/philosophies, but they do definitely respect him. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
In addition, you have also repeatedly stated that Ron Paul is not a Republican, even though he is a member of the party and attempted to become their presidential candidate.


Ron Paul is primarily and at heart, a Libertarian, NOT a Republican. You should know this by now. And the ONLY reason why he's ran Republican for much of his career, is because one has to play the two party system in order to get your message out and gain a substantial following...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noMS40OhI8E

Caputh wrote:
Politicians (and academics and media personalities) would therefore seem to receive or take on designations that are not universally accepted by all.


Some of them do, yes.

Caputh wrote:
If I were to take Glenn Beck, who describes himself as a Libertarian, and say his opinions mirror your views or Ron Paul's to a 100%, I think you would reject the suggestion, too and rightly.


But despite Beck's claim, the rest of that particular hypothetical example is NOT the case and hence it negates your point. :roll:

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:58 pm
Posts: 13142
Location: Home of The Mondavi Center.
Does Ron Paul still get it on with Mrs. Paul? Is that where Mrs. Paul's crap cakes come from? I thought this was about woman's orgasm DB? :?

I want to know just how you make Dina-Moe hum a lot and her sister too! DB, you got the biggest balls, please regale us with the story of how you attained this status and how it relates to a woman's orgasm. Please? I gotsta' know! What's your magic touch bro'! :?:

_________________
I'm getting larger as I walk away.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Disco Boy wrote:
No, I have produced Keynesians that conform to Keynesian thought. It's just that you are desperately trying to blur the lines, like you ALWAYS do, and make it seem like that's not the case, despite the FACT it is, since not every economist agrees with each other regarding every policy/philosophy. :roll:


No, you have produced Keynesians who belong to a particular school of thought I don't agree with, as I made clear from the beginning. Or, in the case of Bernanke, you have produced somebody who one can hardly describe as a Keynesian at all.

Disco Boy wrote:
You're blurring the lines again. That's NOT what he or I said. I said Rand Paul's platform differs from Ron Paul's platform. I NEVER said they were entirely different platforms. While Rand and Ron agree on most things...they don't agree on all things. :roll:


I don't think I've ever seen a better example of "blurring the lines" as you put it. Read it back to yourself!

It also rather contradicts this statement made by you previously:

Disco Boy wrote:
Rand and Ron Paul do NOT have the same platform. So comparing them is more than ridiculous. :roll:



Disco Boy wrote:
Once again, Keynesians do NOT endorse ALL of Friedman's policies/philosophies, but they do definitely respect him. :roll:


No, some "Keynesians" endorse some of Friedman's ideas. This makes those "Keynesians" rather unattractive to me.

Disco Boy wrote:
Ron Paul is primarily and at heart, a Libertarian, NOT a Republican. You should know this by now. And the ONLY reason why he's ran Republican for much of his career, is because one has to play the two party system in order to get your message out and gain a substantial following...


As my following statement made clear, I'm prepared to accept that this a legitimate point of view.

Caputh wrote:
Politicians (and academics and media personalities) would therefore seem to receive or take on designations that are not universally accepted by all.


Disco Boy wrote:
Some of them do, yes.


Hey, we agree!

Disco Boy wrote:
But despite Beck's claim, the rest of that particular hypothetical example is NOT the case and hence it negates your point. :roll:


This sentence make absolutely no sense whatsoever. What rest? Beck claims he's a Libertarian. Most Libertarians seem to think the man has nothing to do with Libertarianism. I'm saying it would be unjust of me to claim that Glenn Beck (!!!)= Ron Paul/Disco Boy(!). Equally, I am claiming it is unjust to claim that Bernanke(!!!)/Krugman(!)= all Keynesians.

I really do think a long discussion about the female orgasm might do you (and me, probably) some good. :wink:

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 11:11 pm
Posts: 3609
Location: Vancouver, BC
Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
No, I have produced Keynesians that conform to Keynesian thought. It's just that you are desperately trying to blur the lines, like you ALWAYS do, and make it seem like that's not the case, despite the FACT it is, since not every economist agrees with each other regarding every policy/philosophy. :roll:


No, you have produced Keynesians who belong to a particular school of thought I don't agree with, as I made clear from the beginning. Or, in the case of Bernanke, you have produced somebody who one can hardly describe as a Keynesian at all.


ONE. MORE. TIME. FOR. THE. WORLD.:

No, I have produced Keynesians that conform to Keynesian thought. It's just that you are desperately trying to blur the lines, like you ALWAYS do, and make it seem like that's not the case, despite the FACT it is, since not every economist agrees with each other regarding every policy/philosophy.

And as far as Bernanke is concerned, he's pretty much following the Keynesian play-book page by page. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
You're blurring the lines again. That's NOT what he or I said. I said Rand Paul's platform differs from Ron Paul's platform. I NEVER said they were entirely different platforms. While Rand and Ron agree on most things...they don't agree on all things. :roll:


I don't think I've ever seen a better example of "blurring the lines" as you put it. Read it back to yourself!

It also rather contradicts this statement made by you previously:


Disco Boy wrote:
Rand and Ron Paul do NOT have the same platform. So comparing them is more than ridiculous. :roll:


What I did wasn't blurring the lines, since Rand and Ron have different platforms. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
Once again, Keynesians do NOT endorse ALL of Friedman's policies/philosophies, but they do definitely respect him. :roll:


No, some "Keynesians" endorse some of Friedman's ideas. This makes those "Keynesians" rather unattractive to me.


I still don't think you can say that with certainty.

Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
Ron Paul is primarily and at heart, a Libertarian, NOT a Republican. You should know this by now. And the ONLY reason why he's ran Republican for much of his career, is because one has to play the two party system in order to get your message out and gain a substantial following...


As my following statement made clear, I'm prepared to accept that this a legitimate point of view.

Politicians (and academics and media personalities) would therefore seem to receive or take on designations that are not universally accepted by all.


I don't see how so, especially considering your "following statement" makes a general statement not a specific one, since it doesn't denote Ron Paul's name or platform, etc. :roll:

Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
Some of them do, yes.


Hey, we agree!


I guess so? :?

Caputh wrote:
Disco Boy wrote:
But despite Beck's claim, the rest of that particular hypothetical example is NOT the case and hence it negates your point. :roll:


This sentence make absolutely no sense whatsoever. What rest? Beck claims he's a Libertarian. Most Libertarians seem to think the man has nothing to do with Libertarianism. I'm saying it would be unjust of me to claim that Glenn Beck (!!!)= Ron Paul/Disco Boy(!). Equally, I am claiming it is unjust to claim that Bernanke(!!!)/Krugman(!)= all Keynesians.


:?

But, as far as I know, regarding the rest of your hypothetical example, Beck wouldn't say what you're claiming he would, nor does everyone agree with everyone else on every issue, even if they belong to the same party. And in Bernanke's case, I don't see how so, considering, like I said above, he's pretty much following the Keynesian play-book page by page.

Disco Boy wrote:
I really do think a long discussion about the female orgasm might do you (and me, probably) some good. :wink:


Good point. :wink:

_________________
:53 - :57...

"...I'm absolutely a Libertarian on MANY issues..." ~ Frank Zappa, Rochester, NY, March 11, 1988


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 9:19 am
Posts: 4880
Location: in deepest, darkest Germany
Disco Boy wrote:
But, as far as I know, regarding the rest of your hypothetical example, Beck wouldn't say what you're claiming he would


In case you're interested...

Glenn Beck: “I consider myself a libertarian… I'm a lot closer to Penn Jillette than I am to Chuck Hagel.”

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/gl ... al-liberta

http://ivn.us/opinion/2013/02/27/glenn- ... newcomers/

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/why-libertar ... lenn-beck/

Whether Beck is a libertarian or not is a different matter.

On to the female orgasm. This is a very pleasant feeling females, whether Libertarian or Keynesian, can attain, either alone or in the company of a sensitive companion. It would appear that some females can experience this feeling more than once during sexual intercourse, indeed it is debatable whether the female orgasm is not somehow more intense than the male orgasm, which tends to be attained more quickly and is of shorter duration. Milton Friedman has yet to comment on the macroeconomic ramifications and no wonder, - he's been dead since 2006.

_________________
"I have learned from my mistakes, and I am sure I can repeat them exactly."


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2742 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 ... 110  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group