This is an exact quote, so please excuse the “text type” and typos:
haha I slept right thru it and woke up and was like when is this hurricane happening and my moms like it happened last night
and I had this idea. that the government was creating this so called hurricane in the northeast because none of us are really prepared for it so we’d go and buy a ton of shit at the stores to fuel the economy.
She has zero clue about politics and had no idea that a Paul Krugman even existed on this planet. But it seems like she’s already caught on to his views of how the economy should work. That should just go to show you that even people who hate politics are weary of possible plots to get us to spend and are detecting the idiocy of creating disasters to boost the economy (like Krugman supports).
I just saw this picture pop up on my dash a few times. Mainly reblogged by, of course, anarchists and democratic socialists and communists, praising the image for the truth.
And I agree with the sentiment: Socialism and Communism have not been proven to “not work”. This is because the way the theories have been carried out in the past were not the true definition of Socialism or Communism. And whenever people say that, they get angry. Understandable.
Well, I made a meme of my own. Here it is:
Do you see the shocking similarities? The first statements are literally the same thing. Communists, you get frustrated at the allegation that your system doesn’t work by example of China or Russia? We get frustrated with this one. The history of Somalia is not the way to build a nation around our ideals. The way this has been carried out is not the way to view Libertarianism.
It’s literally the same thing.
Now, I know some of us Libertarians will always make the statement that you hate, and some of you Collectivists will make the statement that we hate. But I, personally, don’t make the statement; this is because the one about Somalia irks me. But the people I see reblogging the first meme talk about how Somalia is Libertopia all the time.
If you hate the ignorance of the first one, why do you project the ignorance of the second one? Learn to be consistent.
I just read an article on the Lookout about how some fat cat is building a libertarian “Fantasy Island.” This really sounds like a good idea, residing on an oilrig platform built by schmucks that don’t believe in strict building codes or government inspectors. Sorry If I sound a bit abrasive but I’ve met these people (Libertarians) and they’re mean spirited windbags.
Yeah, “strict building codes” for my private property. Falls under the “none of your fucking business” category.
I actually really love this idea. I hope that they can connect these societies together to form one sovereign libertarian state. This looks pretty big relatively, but there is definite room for growth. Anyone who tries to stop this project really has no reason to, and should be condemned for neo-conservative-esque actions.
In general though, even if this does form some great country, my main hope is that its success will set an example for already established Western and European states that capitalism can work, and that it’s simply been Corporatism and a mixed-economy that has brought us to our knees countless times and pushed the workers into poverty.
br0. i say fuck da libertarian shit and lets grab some bitches and a resource based economy
Serious response: I have no doubt that on a smaller scale community by community a resource based economy would work. And I definitely love promoting the idea of green energy and a way to make our environment better person by person. But I largely believe in capitalism and believe that with the appropriate amount of freedom (which is quite a bit more than we have now!) we can have both systems functioning here in America.
Joke response: Fuck da idea of CaPiTalI$m! Get mah bitches and we showw dem the good tiems of resource based efficient ekawnomies!
I realized that it’s not Ron Paul who doesn’t believe in the link between HIV and AIDS, it’s Rand Paul, his son. So bear that in mind. I would go edit my post but it’s already out there, so I’m hoping that anyone who reads my response will visit my blog and happen to see this.
Not a joke I'm just a really shy bitch my nigga. Keep up the good stuff.
Oh! Well, okay. Get over that shyness and contact me! I mean, from what I know about you, you seem like you’d be a very intellectually fulfilling person to debate.
You align yourself with a different political ideology and it’s one of your favorite blogs. Most tumbloggers can’t even think of bringing themselves to do that. I think that alone says a decent amount.
Feel free to message me and I’ll keep it private if you’d like!
I’m pretty much going to copy and paste everything from my Tumblr and put it there. The only different content will be the discussions and reblogs I have here versus there. Other than that, all the same original content. Just a heads up!
What was revealed in the audit was startling: $16,000,000,000,000.00 had been secretly given out to US banks and corporations and foreign banks everywhere from France to Scotland. From the period between December 2007 and June 2010, the Federal Reserve had secretly bailed out many of the world’s banks, corporations, and governments. The Federal Reserve likes to refer to these secret bailouts as an all-inclusive loan program, but virtually none of the money has been returned and it was loaned out at 0% interest.
Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000) Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000) Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000) Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000) Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000) Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000) Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000) Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000) JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000) Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000) UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000) Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000) Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000) Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000) BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000) and many many more including banks in Belgium of all places
And here we have the evil of the Fed exposed. Unelected men bailing out huge corporations to benefit them. Corporatism at its finest. Hopefully the audit (brought up by Ron Paul and Alan Grayson) will push the idea forward that the institution is doing us no good. People should inspect this more and find that both parties are looking to monetize debt by the Fed and stay in the pockets of businesses; this central bank is what is keeping our economy in ruins for consumers and booming for rich businessmen.
I’ve had 50 new followers since this post; this is for any of you who are new and didn’t know this. Spreading the message that the Fed is wrong through proof :D
After S&P announced the credit down rating, we saw the plunge of the three major stock indexes of the US. It has been declared the worst market plunge since the 2008 Financial Crisis, and it’s only been one day of trading.
S&P stated that the downgrade was due to a severe lack in spending cuts from the US. We must remember our spending habits have been basically the same in the past few decades, and that it’s that behavior which has drowned us in debt as well as the behavior that has removed us from the AAA credit rating. With no action from Washington to make more cuts, what’s likely to happen?
Well, watch the markets. They’re sure to plummet more for a new recession coming ahead. Then watch out for spending. With spending climbing and climbing, we’re heading for a new need for a debt ceiling increase in a few years time (keeping in consideration our budget deficit). Which means this whole situation will be a repeat, which could, again, lead to another downgrade.
Then we surely must bear in mind the actions of the Federal Reserve, which has brought us detrimental amounts of inflation that is perhaps only two or three quarters away. Surely this behavior will screw our currency as well as our spending and budgets, leading to more market downturns. Even around the world, other markets take dips. We are observing what is now the beginning of the end of our American empire and its habits.
Reblogging for the followers who Anon-bombed my inbox saying that I was an idiot because the markets recovered the following few days. Do you see what happened today? Dropped 430 points so far. I can’t wait to see August’s job report! This kind of mess is only really going to speed up the bust of the Student Loans bubble.
In response to this post, I got a few questions claiming that my logic was faulty, because economies of scale wouldn’t exist in a free-market economy. Assuming the first was a troll, I ignored it, but I got 2 more anons with the same question. Maybe it was the same person, but I’m making a post explaining that economies of scale would still exist in a free-market. They would just exist to a smaller degree.
Businesses will obviously still finance and evaluate their assets, output, and expenses frequently in a free-market. In fact, they’ll have to scrutinize more into it since they’ll be completely on their own and without regulation. Economies of scale occur when Average Total Cost declines as more output is occurring. This effect is mandated by supply and demand. That’s simply business.
To make my point that the sizes of businesses would decrease, let me explain something:
We live in a Representative Republic, meaning it’s easier for businesses to get their say in bills and amendments. Lobbyists are paid big money to ensure handouts for their companies. A prime example are liability caps on oil companies. It removes the ability for many to pursue companies in court, allowing businesses to not be held accountable for their actions.
When businesses make decisions in a free market to increase their assets, with increasing revenue as their final goal, they take a risk. Businesses take many risks in markets and if they screw up, they can be held accountable.
Everytime a firm expands, whether it be hiring a few new workers or building a whole new workplace, it’s taking a large risk. As firms grow and grow, a larger amount of liability is spread over a large amount of workers, consumers, and land. However, the liability is voided when the state is brought in.
This is not to say firms can’t and won’t grow to international sizes in free markets; they will. But they won’t have nearly as much of a market-share nor will the have as little competition. Firms will be held liable for many disputes: from small claims to employee-benefits. The expenses of liability will force many businesses that would otherwise potentially hold a large market-share to drawback.
Anti-trust laws, while they seem to be regulating firms, actually help keep monopolies around. Barriers to entry also prevent new competition. In other words, competition is kept out by government.
Competition would be frequent as firms compete for size without becoming too large in liabilities. The only way a firm could become progressively large is if the way they treat employees is so positive and its output is so productive that claims against the firm won’t be filed. That type of innovation would be imitated and firms would prosper and compete to be better.
These monopolies directly correspond with large economies and diseconomies of scale; monopolies wouldn’t be around without a corporatist state. Economies of scale simply would be much smaller without the state. And that’s all because of the second most favorite word of libertarians (liberty is the first): liability.
Decided to reblog one of my older posts since I had to visit it anyway to provide the link for a friend. I think it’s a nice little post, and the post it links to at the beginning is nice as well. So for all new followers since this post, enjoy some reading material!
Corporatism and mercantile ideals =/= capitalism. Corporations have a burning hatred for Ron Paul because he simply represents none of their interests. It’s why he gets no corporate support. And it’s why corporate media hates him (Fox News, MSNBC, CNN) and fears him. All of those big corporations, banks, and news stations make money from this corrupt system and from the Federal Reserve. They stomp on the little guys with no remorse all for the sake of their profits; they do all of this through government.
I had no intent of showcasing the compliment as “Look guys! Reagan is a god and he complimented Paul!” I meant to show that even the more notable and staunch Republicans can have an admiration for Ron Paul; it doesn’t just extend to moderate conservatives, libertarians, and liberals.
“Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”—Ronald Reagan
Question For The Paul Supporters/Followers: Who Would You Like to See as Ron Paul's Running Mate?
I would really like to see either Dennis Kucinich (simply because he’s honest and holds many good libertarian ideals, and it would be a great political card to try and reach the left and far left) or Andrew Napolitano.
Gary Johnson, as much as I love him, would hurt Ron Paul in my opinion, because he’s very much pro-abortion. While I agree with the pro-abortion sentiment, it’s delusional to believe that the conservatives supporting Paul would stick around for that. Paul’s chances would be ruined.
And Rand Paul is not nearly as popular, brave, nor knowledgeable as his father is, and I think he would also hurt his chances.
Herman Cain is a maybe. He’s a Fed man and his foreign policy is atrocious, but I think Paul could gain a lot of conservative support. But in the event that Paul should pass, Cain as President frightens me a little.
What do you all think? You can name anyone you want to.
But there they are. And if you look at the results at the top, you can see Paul at 1st place with 19,673 votes, with Gingrich at a far 2nd place with 5,737 votes. I wonder why on Earth a corporate news station would remove the poll that showed Ron Paul won the debate?! It just doesn’t make sense!
So I looked into it: the next bubble to pop is certainly the education bubble. I thought it would be the US Bond bubble, but we’ve got a while for that.
This situation is shockingly similar to what happened in 2008. Credit is being over-expanded hugely, allowing for subprime borrowers to take huge loans from banks. These loans are all being securitized into Student Loan Asset-Backed Securities (SLABS) for investors to buy. They lump the high-risk bad loans in with the good ones, thinking that tuition fees will only ever go up and that the market will only keep climbing.
Literally if you were to explain the 2008 Financial Crisis to someone, replace the word mortgages with student loans and you’re near-perfectly explaining what’s happening right now.
And now, since Bernanke announced that interest rates will be kept at near 0% for banks to borrow from each other for another few years, we’re allowing for quite a bit of credit expansion for this bubble to be fueled.
If you add this on to the huge amounts of inflation coming as well as the market plummeting because of government-incompetence, you can see we have no way out. This will pop, we’ll crash, the market will keep crashing, and the currency will crash. It will is all threading right into itself for a perfect end to this country’s spending habits.
The central bank on Tuesday took the unprecedented step of promising it would keep interest rates near zero for a set period of time — at least until 2013 — and said it was exploring other options to support a flagging recovery.
If economic growth slows further and the 9.1 percent jobless rate remains elevated, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke seems likely to act despite the objections of some of his colleagues.
"We now see a greater-than-even chance that (the Fed) will resume quantitative easing later this year or in early 2012," Goldman Sachs analysts said in a research note. "The committee would probably ease policy further if its economic forecast converged to our own, more downbeat view."
Well it’s a shame, truly a shame. We still have about 2 or 3 quarters until the inflation from QE1 and QE2 catches up with our economy, and now we still have another Quantitative Easing up ahead. Inflation is already apparent. Gold broke $1800 today, and it isn’t really going down; it’s certainly a reflection on the money printers.
It’s as if no one learns from history. The Weimar Republic printed money to pay off its debts too (which Bernanke is considering big time) and their currency went straight to hell. Our spending is is over the top and the Dow Jones Industrial Average has plummeted about 700 points in the aggregate over the last 3 days. In response to that, Bernanke is keeping interest rates at about 0% for an announced period of years.
Can anyone say credit inflation? With the market plummeting, over-expansion of credit (fueling our next bubble), and our coming near-hyperinflation, there is no way these issues can be fixed. Unemployment will, with no doubt, rise. The economy is on fire and the Federal Reserve is spraying it with gasoline.
“Capitalism is relatively new in human history. Prior to capitalism, the way people amassed great wealth was by looting, plundering, and enslaving their fellow man. Capitalism made it possible to become wealthy by serving your fellow man.”—Walter E. Williams
I knew you guys were capable of some well executed motherfuckery, but this really takes the cake.
How many of you filing the lawsuit against the cross actually lost someone at the World Trade Center attacks?
Does it really affect you whether or not a cross is erected at a memorial where many people of different religions (Christianity included) died senselessly?
No, it fucking doesn’t. You’re not promoting equality, you’re being a cunt. I respect your beliefs (or lack thereof) but that also means you should respect other people’ beliefs especially during their time of mourning.
Stop thinking you’re being clever. You’re making everyone hate you.
From one Agnostic to an Atheist:
Please shut the fuck up, sit the fuck down, and remember those lost.
It DOES affect us, actually.
Around half of the people who died were Christian. The rest were Muslim, Atheist, Jewish, etc.
Before now, NO, absolutely NO religious figure was supposed to be at Ground Zero. That was made clear. But of course, the only exception is a cross, because Christianity is ‘completely American!’ Any other religious figure or anything has been turned down.
Us Atheists want actual equality, not just promotion of Christianity and ignoring every other religion. It’s either all religious signs are shown, or none, in my eyes. And none is better.
I don’t believe it (no pun intended). You completely ignored the point I made.
You didn’t know anyone in the attacks.
The memorial isn’t about you. Get over yourself. The memorial is about the victims who died that day due to a senseless act of violence (and those who survive them). If any of the victims really had any qualms about this addition, they would have raised their voice. They obviously don’t, and unlike you, see the bigger picture behind this memorial.
I said it before and I’ll say it again:
IT’S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU
I say this: the Cross is okay. I say that as an atheist. That being said, though, every other religious symbol requested should be put up as well. Especially if this memorial is public property.
I’m sorry, if it’s public property, then it’s unconstitutional to only put up the Cross and exclude the other symbols. Even something to represent the atheist victims must be placed up. It’s an all-or-nothing deal with public property. No in-betweens.
Keeping that in mind, if those who are putting up the Cross are trying to exclude the others from expressing their grievances on public property, then a lawsuit is absolutely acceptable, because the Christians are then the ones, as petro puts it, being the cunts. They’re also infringing on the Separation of Church and State by requesting the favor of one faith over another.
Though, I don’t know much about the situation nor am I aware if it’s private or public property. If it’s private, then everyone else needs to suck it up and accept that it’s private land; they need to, instead of complain, buy their own plot of land to place a memorial for those of the other faiths. Freedom of speech is all encompassing, so allow it to be present everywhere. Because it’s all or nothing, and I’m sure we all prefer “all.”
Interesting. I was expecting talk on the T-Notes and T-Bonds, etc., as well as Gold for those who believe it, but not so much about student loans.
I know it’s an issue and that higher education is turning out that way, and I’ve been expecting it, but I think it still has a good amount of years before it’s a huge danger. I think we’re going to have something, perhaps the bonds (but not definitely), be a larger danger before such an event.
Though I have not been looking too much into the student loan industry, so I obviously can be very wrong.