Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You need to go back and read my other posts. I've already answered that question. But then again, you wouldn't agree, so what is the point of arguing? Let's just agree to disagree.
You are a Libertarian. Back in college, I signed up to help the Libertarian party. I met their VP choice at the time. Libertarians Are Not Anarchists! Just sayin'
While it is true that some individuals favor a political system of competing vigilante committees, and refer to this position as “anarcho-capitalism” (a view formerly held by libertarian economist Murray Rothbard), this is a confusing misnomer based on an apparent failure to clearly distinguish between the nature of market institutions (which do not involve the use of coercion at all, either initiatory or retaliatory) and the nature of coercive entities (criminal or legal). Actually, libertarianism rests on the concepts of individualism, self-ownership, private property, & voluntary (market) exchange. Classical anarchism not only opposed the political state, but also some voluntary organizations of which it disapproved. Most importantly, true anarchists opposed private property – without which no voluntary relationships are possible. Today’s libertarians are in the classical liberal tradition of Algernon Sidney, John Locke, Adam Smith, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Edmund Burke, Herbert Spencer, and Frederic Bastiat – not the anarchist tradition of Proudhon, Kropotkin, and Bakunin.
I'm also not an anarchist. I just want the government to be at least 90-95% smaller than it is today. And there are many things that the market does better. There are many views of Libertarianism. Some are minicharist and others are anarcho-capitalist. Similar to how there are different schools of free market economics. Austrian school vs Chicago school. There is no defined "standard" for how much government a libertarian society should have. You ask 50 libertarians about the role of government, and you're likely to get 50 different answers. The only thing that is fundamental about libertarianism is that view that no one should have a monopoly on force. This is why I feel as a libertarian, there should not be a public police force, and should be left up to the market.
Too much government intervention gave us the 2008 recession. Need proof? The Federal Reserve printed $2 trillion in QE to buy Fannie and Freddie MBS (GSE products, exclusively, NOT Wall Street or private sector-issued MBS) to keep the tens of thousands of defaulting homeowners (who never should have even qualified for a mortgage in the first place, but did so due to GSE/HUD "Affordable Lending" programs) in their homes for free.
And taxpayers are paying interest on that ~$2 trillion.
A very nice (but desperate) attempt to deflect responsibility.
See the Gramm, Leach, Bliley Act, a GOP piece of legislation sometimes called the "Investment Modernization Act" that lead to all of the derivative trading that sank the economy.
The ultimate in supply side economics. Better yet, Dubya's TARP program allowed Wall St shysters who pulled the strings to pay themselves obscene bonuses at taxpayer expense.
A very nice (but desperate) attempt to deflect responsibility.
Actually, it's the TRUE cause of the 2008 mortgage meltdown and subsequent financial crisis.
Quote:
See the Gramm, Leach, Bliley Act, a GOP piece of legislation sometimes called the "Investment Modernization Act" that lead to all of the derivative trading that sank the economy.
How odd, then, that the Federal Reserve didn't have to print $2 trillion in QE to buy any of those derivatives, but DID have to print $2 trillion in QE to buy HUD-mandated Affordable Lending program GSE-issued MBS, exclusively.
Recognize the problem, yet, Old Gringo? The problem wasn't derivatives. The problem was the crap "Affordable Lending" loans (which never should have been made in the first place) bundled into the $5-6 trillion worth of MBS issued by Fannie and Freddie, $2 trillion of which the Federal Reserve had to print QE to buy to keep the economy from crashing.
A very nice (but desperate) attempt to deflect responsibility.
See the Gramm, Leach, Bliley Act, a GOP piece of legislation sometimes called the "Investment Modernization Act" that lead to all of the derivative trading that sank the economy.
The ultimate in supply side economics. Better yet, Dubya's TARP program allowed Wall St shysters who pulled the strings to pay themselves obscene bonuses at taxpayer expense.
ah yes GLBAct.... an act of congress supported by a bi-partisian majority and championed by President Clinton and his Sec of Treasury.... AFTER republicans agreed to include expansion of CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) that ended in massive numbers of bad loans to people that couldn't afford the.
GLBAct was terrible legislation. (Bad deregulation)
Expansion of CRA was terrible legislation (Bad Regulation)
It took both parties together to compromise to get such a bad result.
PS DONALD TRUMP is the only candidate that has proposed repealing that mess and going back to Glass Stiegel.
Hillary Clinton has stated she opposes such efforts. Evidently all the $$$$$$ she has gotten from the Banksters has turned Liberal Policy into shills for big banks.
I picked I don't know, not because I don't know, rather because you didn't have "mixed bag" as an option.
FDR was quite willing to fight bad guys. He was all in in WW2 and that was a great thing
FDR was pretty wrong on the economy and there is tons of scholarly work out there that drives that point home.
Forgot about this thread for a hot minute and now I come back and there's 14 pages! That's a lot of reading I don't have time for at the moment as I am moving out of my apartment.
I do have to say, even though the poll is a resounding yes, FDR was a good president, it appears the ones who voted no are much more vocal. It would be interesting to see those who voted Yes to speak up a little bit more.
Forgot about this thread for a hot minute and now I come back and there's 14 pages! That's a lot of reading I don't have time for at the moment as I am moving out of my apartment.
I do have to say, even though the poll is a resounding yes, FDR was a good president, it appears the ones who voted no are much more vocal. It would be interesting to see those who voted Yes to speak up a little bit more.
50/50 a resounding yes? Going to check my dictionary... ... I'm back. I didn't really have to go. Anyway, nope, NOT resounding. Resounding means unequivocal, or emphatic. 51% "yes", and 49% "No or not sure" is NOT emphatic, and NOT unequivocal, and therefore NOT resounding.
And those who voted yes, given the public school support for collectivism and collectivist heroes, are largely non-thinking parrots regurgitating the cynical faded party line of their dopey school teachers, MOST OR ALL OF WHOM were fanboys of this decrepit destroyer of freedom and liberty.
The fact that most people went to public school and were subject to 12-15 years of indoctrination, and yet 50% of them are NOT ON BOARD with genuflecting to this murderer of American values, is a tribute of sorts, I guess...
Last edited by Marc Paolella; 07-29-2016 at 03:01 PM..
Reactionary is right, BUT FDR avoided insurrection and revolution by instituting those programs. 1/3 of the population was out of work and most of the middle class and some of the emergent upper class lost their investments. They had worked many years to acquire wealth only to lose it because speculators and banks were buying stocks on credit. Now they had nothing because of dishonest people running a shell game on wall st. You cant have a third of the country without work or prospects to feed their families and expect things not to get violent. Look at the French revolution, the rise of communism in Russia, and the rise of Hitler in Germany. People do desperate things and follow crazy leaders when they got nothing. Thats why in 2008 the incoming democratic president and the outgoing republican president met to discuss options for bailing out the big banks and keeping the status quo in place. If 100 million americans went without work today there would be REAL problems.
As I recall reading, you could buy stock with 10% down.
the more you read about FDR and his propaganda control administration, he was bad.
I've read 30+ books on him, and endless magazine articles and newspaper articles. The end result of that was that I believe him to be among the best we've had. The relentless propaganda against him is laughable, sour grapes to the nth degree. The right hates him because he was Roosevelt. They don't need more cause, and in deed don't have more cause, than that.
50/50 a resounding yes? Going to check my dictionary... ... I'm back. I didn't really have to go. Anyway, nope, NOT resounding. Resounding means unequivocal, or emphatic. 51% "yes", and 49% "No or not sure" is NOT emphatic, and NOT unequivocal, and therefore NOT resounding.
And those who voted yes, given the public school support for collectivism and collectivist heroes, are largely non-thinking parrots regurgitating the cynical faded party line of their dopey school teachers, MOST OR ALL OF WHOM were fanboys of this decrepit destroyer of freedom and liberty.
The fact that most people went to public school and were subject to 12-15 years of indoctrination, and yet 50% of them are NOT ON BOARD with genuflecting to this murderer of American values, is a tribute of sorts, I guess...
You cannot combine the Not Sure votes with the No votes. They are not the same answer.
And you are definitely over-heated about this for some reason! Take a chill pill... Relax... It's a President we are talking about who was probably voted in before you were alive. No need to be insulting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
