Support NeoGAF

[ToxicAdam]

So you would burn down a house to fix a leaky roof.

Person A: That thing blew up cause the regulators weren't doing anything.
Person B: Maybe we should stop electing people who say regulations are bad so corrupt regulators will stop being hired and appointed.
Person A: Nah, do away with regulations altogether.
Person B: ?????

I sense a history of politics and political thought that is ignored in your reference to "colossal failures of regulators over the past 3 decades".

The only thing worse than your tortured analogies is your insistence on putting words into people's mouth.

I was quite clearly saying that our current system is broken. And we may need regulators to watch the regulators (ie. another layer of the onion.)

I eagerly await your next response with a new shitty analogy and indifference to my actual intentions.

 

[Hitokage]

By and large, libertarians are the spoiled children of the post-industrial age.

 

[A Human Becoming]

By and large, libertarians are the spoiled children of the post-industrial age.

How so?

 

[SomeDude]

By and large, libertarians are the spoiled children of the post-industrial age.

liberterians are constitutional extremist.

 

[JCX]

Serious question. Has anyone met a poor libertarian? There seem to be well-of socialists, but in my limited anecdotal experience, I've never met a poor libertarian.

 

[ToxicAdam]

By and large, baby boomers are the spoiled children of the post-industrial age.

Why limit yourself?

 

[Mardak]

By and large, libertarians are the spoiled children of the post-industrial age.

There are things like the internet that now lower the barriers of communication to getting accurate reviews of both private and public establishments.

1 star reviews of a restaurant that turned away customers? I won't bother going there or even that district/community.

1 star review of a product that breaks or is unsafe? No purchase.

 

[besada]

I love how people sling insults at those who support Ron Paul because of their own insecurities. Can't respond like a normal well thought person? Sling insults to make yourself feel superior. Brilliant! It speaks quite a bit for all of what's wrong in this country and the general negative attitude of it.

People sling insults at Ron Paul libertarians because the internet's full of them all saying the same dumb things, over and over and over and over, without the tiniest shred of evidence to back any of it up, and with an incredibly poor grasp of history.

And what insecurities are you talking about? The only people who think any libertarian has a chance of succeeding are the people who constantly support Paul, even though he hasn't got the strength of his convictions and isn't ever going to be anything more than a Congessperson -- and that for not much longer.

And I'll note, that rather than respond to one of the several people who are actually addressing the issues being discussed, you're sitting around whining about how poorly you're treated. You'll also note that I've called no one a Paultard, nor have I made a personal attack on anyone. Your philosophy, though? That's fair game for ridicule.

 

[Hitokage]

How so?

They've grown up in a society that has protected them from a lot of the really bad developments of the industrial revolution, so they think this way of life comes naturally.

Why limit yourself?

That's a different point, even if true.

 

[SomeDude]

People sling insults at Ron Paul libertarians because the internet's full of them all saying the same dumb things, over and over and over and over, without the tiniest shred of evidence to back any of it up, and with an incredibly poor grasp of history.

And what insecurities are you talking about? The only people who think any libertarian has a chance of succeeding are the people who constantly support Paul, even though he hasn't got the strength of his convictions and isn't ever going to be anything more than a Congessperson -- and that for not much longer.

And I'll note, that rather than respond to one of the several people who are actually addressing the issues being discussed, you're sitting around whining about how poorly you're treated. You'll also note that I've called no one a Paultard, nor have I made a personal attack on anyone. Your philosophy, though? That's fair game for ridicule.

Ron Paul will win the republican nomination in 2012. The economic crisis/bailouts have radicalized americans. He does have a good shot of winning.

 

[Arrowgigantic]

I've never met a poor libertarian.

I have. Have I ever met a poor libertarian with poor parents? No.

 

[Hitokage]

Ron Paul will win the republican nomination in 2012. The economic crisis/bailouts have radicalized americans. He does have a good shot of winning.

How can this be possible WHEN AMERICA HAS BROKEN UP BY THEN?

 

[Mardak]

Serious question. Has anyone met a poor libertarian? There seem to be well-of socialists, but in my limited anecdotal experience, I've never met a poor libertarian.

What do you mean by poor? Low income? High school and college students? Those people are being dumped on by the lawmakers by increasing the debt for future generations to pay. They are tired of this "tax".

 

[besada]

Ron Paul will win the republican nomination in 2012. The economic crisis/bailouts have radicalized americans. He does have a good shot of winning.

No, he won't. Add that to the list of miserably failed predictions you continue to make.

And when he doesn't, he's done. No seat to go back to, no political base to work with. I'm sure he'll finally admit he's a libertarian and make another flailing attempt at office, but once he's out from under the cloak of the Republicans, and guaranteed never to hold any power again, the rest of us can forget he exists.

Couldn't your time be more wisely spent arguing on random Internet boards for the formation of Cascadia, your white paradise in the north anyway?

 

[Wall]

The only thing worse than your tortured analogies is your insistence on putting words into people's mouth.

I was quite clearly saying that our current system is broken. And we may need regulators to watch the regulators (ie. another layer of the onion.)

I eagerly await your next response with a new shitty analogy and indifference to my actual intentions.

From your posting history and your hostile response to my initial point, it seemed that you were making the opposite point. Nothing in my original post precludes the measures that you apparently advocate.

To me, the logical response to my original point for someone holding the view you seem to hold would have been to post what you just posted now as a suggestion or elaboration. Since you instead decided to accuse me of "ignoring" the failure of the existing regulatory agency, I interpreted your post as siding with those arguing against the existence of regulations at all. As a result, I interpreted your next post as a sarcastic response questioning whether more regulation would work when existing regulations failed.

I apologize for the misunderstanding and did not mean to ascribe views to you that you do not hold.

 

[SomeDude]

How can this be possible WHEN AMERICA HAS BROKEN UP BY THEN?

Obama has and approval of 39. By now it's obvious that the republican/right has been broken into two categories, but the left is begginning too as well.

I predict a break up of the united states within the next 1-5 years.

 

[KtSlime]

There are things like the internet that now lower the barriers of communication to getting accurate reviews of both private and public establishments.

1 star reviews of a restaurant that turned away customers? I won't bother going there or even that district/community.

1 star review of a product that breaks or is unsafe? No purchase.

What the hell is the internet? Isn't it that thing that was created by all those tax dollars handed over to a big socialist government?

Do you really think we would have the Internet if left up to libertarians?

Spoiler

We could have 50, then we would have to research which internet is the best internet.

 

[JCX]

What do you mean by poor? Low income? High school and college students? Those people are being dumped on by the lawmakers by increasing the debt for future generations to pay. They are tired of this "tax".

Guess I should have clarified. A libertarian from a low income family.

 

[besada]

Almost as good as the time BS credited private enterprise for the space program.

 

[state-of-the-art]

By and large, libertarians are the spoiled children of the post-industrial age.

A lot of what they say looks good on paper, but there is no reflection on the human cost of the policies they're advocating.

 

[Kusagari]

Ron Paul will win the republican nomination in 2012. The economic crisis/bailouts have radicalized americans. He does have a good shot of winning.

Until straw polls actually matter, Ron Paul isn't winning anything.

 

[SomeDude]

No, he won't. Add that to the list of miserably failed predictions you continue to make.

And when he doesn't, he's done. No seat to go back to, no political base to work with. I'm sure he'll finally admit he's a libertarian and make another flailing attempt at office, but once he's out from under the cloak of the Republicans, and guaranteed never to hold any power again, the rest of us can forget he exists.

Couldn't your time be more wisely spent arguing on random Internet boards for the formation of Cascadia, your white paradise in the north anyway?

You're lieing.


His son Rand just won the senate seat in ketucky and now ron's ideology has spraed acorss america. He is the godfather of the current tea party movement.


No - I think will be hearing much more about ron paul in our future. Possibly more so than even before.

 

[besada]

You're lieing.

I am neither lieing, nor am I lying, which is how us people in the real world spell that word.

 

[Puddles]

Mardak is still going strong?

Well, I argued libertarian viewpoints for a solid year when I was 18, so it'll probably take him more than a few days.

 

[SomeDude]

I am neither lieing, nor am I lying, which is how us people in the real world spell that word.

Ron Paul is more popular than he has ever been. He's not going to dissapear.

 

[Hitokage]

You're lieing.

I don't see the edit.

Ron Paul is more popular than he has ever been. He's not going to dissapear.

His district will, though.

 

[Trouble]

You're lieing.


His son Rand just won the senate seat in ketucky and now ron's ideology has spraed acorss america. He is the godfather of the current tea party movement.


No - I think will be hearing much more about ron paul in our future. Possibly more so than even before.

His candle blew out after the 2008 race. He won't get the nom and won't run 3rd party.

The current tea party movement is just a brand of super far right christian conservatism. They may agree with some of his economic theories, but they wouldn't stomach his foreign policy or domestic social policy views. Bachmann has the tea party for this election, that marriage is consumated at this point.

 

[Clevinger]

His son Rand just won the senate seat in ketucky and now ron's ideology has spraed acorss america. He is the godfather of the current tea party movement.

Well, you're right about that. Rand Paul will continue to be a pain in America's balls far after Ron leaves the stage.

 

[besada]

Ron Paul is more popular than he has ever been. He's not going to dissapear.

I'm sure you'll still be around in a few years trying to sell your vision of secession, so we can table this until then, at which point I'll have another good laugh at you.

 

[Oblivion]

Really amazing article on the contradictions between those who are the most devout Christians also being the most pro-free market:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-christianity/2011/08/12/gIQAziaQBJ_blog.html

 

[Mardak]

I'm actually familiar with the history of regulations in America, and what it was like before we had federal regulatory agencies.

They may have been good at the time or perhaps even necessary, but who is to say that they are still needed now?

Just like various laws might have been useful in the past, they stay around and get twisted into something they weren't designed for. For example, the "Federal Wire Act prohibits electronic transmission of information for sports betting across telecommunications lines" was created way before the internet became commonplace in the 90s, but it was used to prevent online gambling because the internet happens to run as electronic transmissions.

Ron Paul would repeal the ban on internet gambling because 1) the ban prevents people do with their money as they see fit and 2) government wouldn't be allowed to interfere with the internet.

In general, the world is a very different place with the internet.

 

[KtSlime]

A lot of what they say looks good on paper, but there is no reflection on the human cost of the policies they're advocating.

This. When people are simply statistics, and you have an infinite amount of time, then yeah, Free Market all the way, let shit happen. But wait, humans are irrational beings that experience pain, and fear, and a whole mess of other emotions, they sometimes do good things, and sometimes do incredibly selfish things - it is not fair to the people experiencing hardships/pain/death to just 'let it all work out in time'.

 

[speculawyer]

By what I've heard, Ron Paul has an open invitation to run on the Libertarian ticket.

Assuming that is true and he were to accept, that would pretty much seal up this election.

 

[besada]

The current tea party movement is just a brand of super far right christian conservatism. They may agree with some of his economic theories, but they wouldn't stomach his foreign policy or domestic social policy views. Bachmann has the tea party for this election, that marriage is consumated at this point.

Yes, I'm trying to imagine my sixty year old aunts and uncles supporting his drive to legalize heroin, and I'm having a hard time with it.

 

[Hitokage]

Really amazing article on the contradictions between those who are the most devout Christians also being the most pro-free market:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-christianity/2011/08/12/gIQAziaQBJ_blog.html

That reminds me, on NPR recently there was a clip of some pro-Perry pastor denouncing the evils of Babylon, listing how it would teach tolerance, compassion, and good works... but for the wrong reasons! I was in stitches.

 

[Trouble]

By what I've heard, Ron Paul has an open invitation to run on the Libertarian ticket.

Assuming that is true and he were to accept, that would pretty much seal up this election.

As in he would win? Or BO would get reelected?

I could see his 3rd party run helping the latter, since more Rep votes would be peeled off than Dem votes would by his run.

 

[speculawyer]

They may have been good at the time or perhaps even necessary, but who is to say that they are still needed now?

Sure. But that brings up an interesting question.

What would be the point of getting rid of the civil rights act now? Other than to allow racists practice racism openly, what would be gained?

Is that your goal? Open racism?

 

[Piecake]

They may have been good at the time or perhaps even necessary, but who is to say that they are still needed now?

Just like various laws might have been useful in the past, they stay around and get twisted into something they weren't designed for. For example, the "Federal Wire Act prohibits electronic transmission of information for sports betting across telecommunications lines" was created way before the internet became commonplace in the 90s, but it was used to prevent online gambling because the internet happens to run as electronic transmissions.

Ron Paul would repeal the ban on internet gambling because 1) the ban prevents people do with their money as they see fit and 2) government wouldn't be allowed to interfere with the internet.

In general, the world is a very different place with the internet.

The 2008 economic crisis says they are still needed now.

 

[SomeDude]

I'm sure you'll still be around in a few years trying to sell your vision of secession, so we can table this until then, at which point I'll have another good laugh at you.

35 pecent of texans said in a poll back in 2009 that they favor secession.


Ted Rall has been prediciting secession as well. He compared it to the soivet union, which is very real.

 

[speculawyer]

Really amazing article on the contradictions between those who are the most devout Christians also being the most pro-free market:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-christianity/2011/08/12/gIQAziaQBJ_blog.html

I was raised and confirmed a Lutheran. Granted I am an atheist now (due to science), I find the Jesus that Bachmann and most of the right talk about completely unrecognizable.

 

[Mardak]

What would be the point of getting rid of the civil rights act now?

There isn't. Nobody is pushing to get rid of the Civil Rights Act. Only those that say libertarian principles are extreme and will do everything to reach their ideals.

Ron Paul does not campaign to get rid of the Civil Rights Act not because it would be unpopular. It's because that's not a priority to fix the country if it were to have any effect.

Ron Paul campaigns to stop the wars and to keep the money for US citizens who can then decide how they want to spend their own money instead of letting corporate influence on the federal government pick and choose.

 

[TacticalFox88]

I was raised and confirmed a Lutheran. Granted I am an atheist now (due to science), I find the Jesus that Bachmann and most of the right talk about completely unrecognizable.

That's because he doesn't exist. Jesus is socially a liberal. Period.

 

[besada]

35 pecent of texans said in a poll

Now you're lieing.

35% of Texans said they believed Texas had the right to secede. About one-fifth of Texans were in favor of it. It was a Rasmussen poll, and it's a better indicator of the poor educational system in Texas than anything else.

 

[TacticalFox88]

Now you're lieing.

35% of Texans said they believed Texas had the right to secede. About one-fifth of Texans were in favor of it. It was a Rasmussen poll, and it's a better indicator of the poor educational system in Texas than anything else.

I wonder if those idiots realize that if Texas secedes it'd probably last what? Five years at best?

 

[SecretMoblin]

That's because he doesn't exist. Jesus is socially a liberal. Period.

Yeah, his positions on abortion, euthanasia, pot legalization, the reading of Miranda rights, nuclear power, and the Fairness Doctrine were pretty rad. I also hear he supported a graduated income tax!

Spoiler

:-/

 

[Mardak]

No, he won't. Add that to the list of miserably failed predictions you continue to make.

What makes your prediction more important/credible than SomeDude?

This is no better than the national media ignoring Ron Paul's virtual tie for 1st place in the Iowa Straw Poll. Not only do they only talk about the 1st place and 3rd place, who is now out of the race; they also misrepresent the facts.

They say Ron Paul has no chance against Obama if he were to win the primaries. Head-to-head polls show Obama doing worst when head-to-head against Ron Paul as independents will vote for Ron Paul.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...12_presidential_election/obama_41_ron_paul_37
Obama gets the fewest votes when head-to-head against Ron Paul.

Other head-to-head polls show Ron Paul doing *best* against Obama by either having the most votes compared to other republicans or having the most positive difference in votes:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-runner-in-the-battle-for-the-gop-nomination/

 

[TacticalFox88]

Yeah, his positions on abortion, euthanasia, pot legalization, the reading of Miranda rights, nuclear power, and the Fairness Doctrine were pretty rad. I also hear he supported a graduated income tax!

Spoiler

:-/

 

[Oblivion]

Yeah, his positions on abortion, euthanasia, pot legalization, the reading of Miranda rights, nuclear power, and the Fairness Doctrine were pretty rad. I also hear he supported a graduated income tax!

Spoiler

:-/

He'd probably support pot legalization.

Also, why are you mocking the graduated income tax, when Jebus took it 10 steps further than that?

 

[besada]

I wonder if those idiots realize that if Texas secedes it'd probably last what? Five years at best?

As dumb and hurtful to both Texas and the country secession would be, why would you assume it couldn't sustain itself? It's the second largest economy in the U.S., the largest exporter of goods, and it puts more into the federal government than it takes out. I don't think I'd want to live there once the influence of the federal government ceased, but I see no compelling reason that it would collapse. It has virtually everything a country needs to sustain itself within it's borders, and considering it contains a huge number of oil refineries, it isn't likely to run out of money any time soon.

I'm curious what your rationale is.

 

[Puddles]

There is no sane policy EXCEPT a graduated income tax.

Show me one good argument for a flat tax. Just one.