# This One's for The Obama Loyalists, Pay Attention. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 19, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784 "2010-08-19T20:08:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 7:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/381 "2010-08-27T07:30:14Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Lets seriously stick to the important issues, okay? I am not a Tea Party member. I am not here to defend the Tea Party. I am speaking for myself and people I know who are very angry at the current administration and the government. I am far from what you see on TV and none of the people I know are middle age white people. > > How do you want me to prove that the protest I attended was diverse? I live in California, for one thing. The rally I attended was an independent libertarian rally, no GOP involvement. I don’t have pictures to email you. > > Its up to you whether you believe me or not. But lets focus on the substance of the protests rather than this bullshit. I live in California also. I’ve seen pictures of Minutemen rallies that were far from diverse. Sorry, just being in the state is no guarantee of diversity. Was this rally covered by the news? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/382 "2010-08-27T07:33:08Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > How can that be accomplished through inflationism and debt? Enlighten me. > > What inflation? Get the fuck out of here. What inflation? The inflation the Federal Reserve has been creating since its creation. That inflation. The devaluation of the dollar by 96%. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/383 "2010-08-27T07:43:51Z")
> [@CannyDan](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > I don’t agree that they are right wing. I don’t see things through those narrow lenses. Did you already know about the creation of the Federal Reserve on Jekyl Island? Did you know about the Cantillion effect of inflation and how our monetary system enriches the wealthy at the expense of the poor? I would think for a liberal such as yourself, you would care that the very big government you advocate is impoverishing people. Given your screen name, how do you feel that FDR’s New Deal policies lengthened the Depression? Did you know that FDR maneuvered and provoked Japan into an anticipated attack on Pearl Harbor to justify American entry into World War II? It is the truth: > > > > [http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pearl\_harbor.htm](http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pearl_harbor.htm) > > > > The man who caused a three to four year downturn to become a fifteen year catastrophe and lied to get us involved in the bloodiest war of the last century is your model president? How about Lyndon Johnson escalating the war in Vietnam? And similarly, how about the devaluation of the dollar and the growing income gap as the government grew over the decades? > > > > Your side typically derides libertarians for not caring about the poor and being cruel and insensitive. I am saying that I am a libertarian BECAUSE I care about the poor and middle class more than the rich. The system you advocate is impoverishing people. Then the government throws them some crumbs and we are supposed to be grateful? > > > > Respond to these points. You claim to care about the poor right? You want a more progressive and fair system in America, right? How can that be accomplished through inflationism and debt? Enlighten me. > > You’re kidding, right? No, I suspect you are not. > > I’ve been reading along, frankly not too impressed with your arrogance and your arguments, but enjoying the discussion. But at this post you’ve jumped completely off the rails, left the roadway, skidded down the ditch, rolled over, fallen off the cliff, crashed onto the rocks, and… Well. > > FDR basically turned a “market correction” into the greatest and most protracted depression (jury is still out on the present one) of all time? And caused the war in the Pacific? All to further someone’s financial situation. “It is the truth”. > > Holy cow. > > If that’s Libertarian ::truth::, well, I don’t think I’m gonna bother reading your screeds any longer. > > Sheesh. Talk about monumental fail. Tag-- you’re it. FDR didn’t pursue policies that he thought would lengthen the Depression, but thats the effect that they had. Some evidence: > **[Newsroom](https://newsroom.ucla.edu)** [http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/10/14/abc-finds-fdr-partly-blame-10-year-great-depression](http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth/2008/10/14/abc-finds-fdr-partly-blame-10-year-great-depression) > **[Mises Daily | Mises Institute](https://mises.org/mises-daily)** This is almost common knowledge at this point. FDR really knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor before it happened. Then he used it as an excuse to get involved in World War II. As sensationalistic as that sounds, it is absolutely true. Some evidence: [http://rationalrevolution.net/war/fdr\_provoked\_the\_japanese\_attack.htm](http://rationalrevolution.net/war/fdr_provoked_the_japanese_attack.htm) > **[European Anti-Globalists Join Forces to Take Back Countries](https://thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/european-anti-globalists-join-forces-to-take-back-countries/)** > > European political leaders opposed to globalism and the establishment met in Koblenz, Germany, over the weekend to cement their alliance and plan for potential victories in the months ahead. By Alex Newman > **[More Evidence FDR Knew About Pearl In Advance](https://rense.com/general60/moreevidenceFDRknew.htm)** Even many mainstream historians are admitting that FDR and members of his administration knew about the planned attack on Pearl Harbor and wanted to use the attack to get support for our involvement in the war. Did you really look into this, or did you simply write it off without any thought? ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/384 "2010-08-27T07:46:02Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > I don’t care how many of you disagree with me. I could count on one hand the number of people who actually engaged in a substantial way with what I have posted. > > > > Isn’t there someone here who truly believes in the value of the welfare state and resists efforts to cut spending that will challenge my positions? Are there liberals and progressives that believe in cutting spending across the board? > > Define welfare state. Let’s at least have a clue to your beliefs. Do you hate Social Security which is not paid for by taxes as much as you hate tax relief to corporations ? No, I don’t hate Social Security. It is one of the least offensive things our government does. It IS offensive how they take your money to be put into a “trust fund” for your retirement then loot the trust fund and spend the money on other things. Yes, that pisses me off. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 7:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/385 "2010-08-27T07:51:21Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > The Tea Partiers don’t represent an opportunity for the implementation of libertarian economics. Just try to take away their Medicare and Social Security and they’ll burn you in effigy faster than you can say “laissez faire.” Sure, many are complete hypocrites. There is so many worse things going on than funding Medicare and Social Security, however. I’m sure there are things that they are angry about that are valid. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 7:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/386 "2010-08-27T07:58:22Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > Did you know that FDR maneuvered and provoked Japan into an anticipated attack on Pearl Harbor to justify American entry into World War II? It is the truth: > > > > [http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pearl\_harbor.htm](http://www.apfn.org/apfn/pearl_harbor.htm) > > Oh goodie, a Pearl Harbor conspiracy theorist as well. How could anyone question the validity of such pearls of wisdom like this from your link: > > > [@](#): > > > > Roosevelt was a 33rd degree mason. That is the highest level one can attain in the satanic Masonic order. One of objectives of the lucifer worshipping Masonic order is to establish a one world government. After World War I these people tried, and failed, to start a one world government organization, The League of Nations. Realizing they would need another world war to finally create such an organization, they manipulated world events, started and won World War II, and created the United Nations, the tool for the final phase of one world government. Um, ignore that part. Actually I didn’t know the link I posted contained that. Not saying its complete bullshit but its definitely a conspiracy theory. There are many mainstream publications that make this same assertion. It wouldn’t be too far of a stretch, would it? The precipitating event to involve us in World War I, the sinking of the Luscitania, was completely made up. The precipitating event to involve us in Vietnam, the Gulf of Tonkin incident was made up as well. But the notion that there was anything suspicious about the knowledge our government had about Pearl Harbor is completely outrageous, akin to believing in Big Foot and the Loch Ness Monster? Get real. You can live in your fantasy world where the government doesn’t do things like this, but I’m living in the real world. Do some more research before you right it off. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 8:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/387 "2010-08-27T08:02:34Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > > [@Dissonance](#): > > > > Oh goodie, a Pearl Harbor conspiracy theorist as well. How could anyone question the validity of such pearls of wisdom like this from your link: > > Now, now…I’m sure **jrodefeld** would tell you that he doesn’t necessarily believe _everything_ on that site - you’re just picking out the nutty stuff. > > Just like I’m unfair in criticizing him for citing [rense.com](http://rense.com) as a good source of news, when he doesn’t necessarily agree with all the pearls of wisdom on that site…like the latest revelations on how Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy, UFO updates, the Big Pharma plan to kill Alternative Medicine, and wonderfully tolerant articles like “Are Jews Today Guilty For The Crucifixion?” (hint: yes) and “Israeli Rabbis On God-Ordained Child Sex Mission”. > > Put down that New York Times and Wall St. Journal, people…this is the real dope!!! I posted the wrong link by accident. Give me a break. The evidence suggests that FDR had knowledge of Pearl Harbor before it happened. Thats not exactly the same level of conspiracy theory as the Illuminati or the faked moon landings or anything. What makes you so sure it is not true? Judge Andrew Napolitano wrote about this in a book he wrote. Many mainstream historians believe this to be the case. Open your eyes. Please, lets not get sidetracked on this issue. I don’t want this to be the main point of this thread. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 8:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/388 "2010-08-27T08:07:48Z")
> [@Oldeb](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > **More Tolerance:** Obviously not everyone is going to be tolerant under any system. But in a libertarian society, where nobody is allowed to take away the rights of anyone else, then people become less resentful and more accepting of other people. If we decide government has no business in marriage, for example, these hot button “culture war” issues would go away and people wouldn’t care. If we allow the notion that a certain state or community can set their own standards and another community can set different rules, then everyone should be happy. People are free to move to a state that is closest to their beliefs. Nobody will feel like another group is forcing their beliefs on them. This would encourage tolerance and goodwill among our citizens. > > This is very optimistic view that simple won’t come true. If things were this simple there would never be any problems between people in the first place. Taking it in pieces: > > You really think that’s how it would work? What if the Supreme Court stood up tomorrow and announced, “Hey, that whole same sex marriage thing? We don’t care. At all. It’s not the government’s concern. Go marry whoever the heck you want. Hell, marry several people so long as they’re all consenting adults. Just shut up about it.” > > Would everyone just drop it? Would it take a few weeks and then fade out? Just like Roe v Wade did? Hell, there is currently an argument about building an Islamic Center in New York, and that’s covered by the First Admendment. We still haven’t fully grasped that one as a nation. > > No, not everyone is going to be happy. What happens if we end up with a State that decides to toss all education spending? It’s very Libertarian to say that people will educate their kids, but in the real world what you’re going to get is a massive group of ignorant people. It’s a small world, and an even smaller country. I _care_ that people across the country aren’t complete morons because it benefits _me_. I am not self sufficent, and I’m going to make the shocking assumption that neither are you. We depend on other people; we _need_ them to not be ignorant losers. > > > [@](#): > > > > People are free to move to a state that is closest to their beliefs. Nobody will feel like another group is forcing their beliefs on them. This would encourage tolerance and goodwill among our citizens. > > Of course it would. Because if we seperate everyone into their own homogeneous societies with disdain or disinterest in their neighbors, nothing bad will happen. Nobody has ever seen people divide themselves along societal lines and demonize “the other.” Never. Nobody would take it upon themselves to force those who are different to “go back to their own kind.” > > Tolerance and goodwill is what you get when people set aside their differences, not what comes from setting aside other people. No, it won’t be perfect. But our political class is good at stirring up animosity to divide people for their own benefit. It happens all the time. In removing hot button issues like gay marriage, religion, and others from the national debate it will improve relations between groups of people. Not completely, but it will help. I am not claiming it will usher in a Utopia and all our problems will go away. I am looking for the best system of many faulty ones. ---
**Author:** ![jrodefeld](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/59ef9b/32.png) [@jrodefeld](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jrodefeld)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 8:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/389 "2010-08-27T08:12:56Z")
> [@straight\_man](#): > > > [@jrodefeld](#): > > > > Inflation is the destruction of money. The Federal Reserve as an institution is designed to create more inflation. When they inflate the currency they are stealing wealth and purchasing power from the poor and middle class. The cost of living goes up for these people. Meanwhile there is no oversight. The Fed can bailout people in secret, make deals with other countries and monetize the debt, creating no incentive for politicians to be frugal. > > Now, you have made one single point over and over again, and it doesn’t begin to pass my plausibility test. I’ve only taken an introductory economics course, so the objection I present is simple. > > You say: inflation hurts the poor and middle class. > > But I ask: which group of people is hurt most by mild inflation? The poor have their wealth mostly in their person, e.g. their capability to earn wages. Inflation will tend to increase their wages (by definition), so most of their wealth remains constant. The working and middle classes have most of their wealth in property and person, and some savings. They’re hurt more, but their property and wages tend to be increased by inflation too (again, by definition.) The direct savings are hurt by inflation. The upper class, on the other hand, has a higher proportion of their wealth in savings, and thus should be the ones hurt most by inflation. IOW, inflation hurts you less, the poorer you are. > > (In fact, this is a bit of a silly generalization, since inflation is based on a basket of goods, and which part of that basket is increasing in price determines the outcome. But we’re assuming it’s evenly spread, simply because jrodefeld has not specified what type of good the fed is responsible for making more expensive. It certainly wouldn’t be food!) > > PS. If and when you finally read this, take note: I gather you’re trying to address each post individually, in order. It’s better to find the main, strongest arguments being made (the ones in big, bolded letters in this thread, for example) and address them. Otherwise, you’re answering objections that have already been strengthened beyond your ability to debate them anyway. Plus, there’s no flow to the thread —you just look like you’re randomly saying whatever comes to mind, without noting the objections, even though that probably isn’t what’s going on. Yes, I am addressing each post individually, in order. Its taking a really fucking long time too. I want to be thorough. I will catch up soon though. Your notions about inflation and their effects are completely wrong. You vastly underestimate the harm caused by inflation. I think I have posted this already, but for your sake, from [Mises.org](http://Mises.org): > **[Mises Institute](https://mises.org/)** > > With the help of our extraordinary supporters, the Mises Institute is the world's leading supporter of the ideas of liberty and the Austrian School of ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/977dab/32.png) [@Captain\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 9:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/390 "2010-08-27T09:22:49Z")
Some thoughts: I think there is room for a third political party out there, but it would take a lot of work by some dedicated people, plus it would have to rely on defections of already known politicians who are sick of the system as is. The so called “tea party” is basically a schism of the Republican party. Problem is that the Tea party movement is leaderless. I remember Sarah Palin addressing their convention in Nashville. Two mistakes there. For one, it took place in Nashville. When people think of Nashville, they think of country music and hicks. Southern idiots with gunracks, whiskey bottles flying out the back with the 15 year old pregnant wife cooking breakfast barefoot listening to Tammy Wynette between hits of Crystal Meth. However, she is a Rhodes Scholar next to Sarah Palin. Having Sarah Palin there really lacked credibility. Then she wrote her speech on her hand. Classic move. At least Alvin Greene brings his well worn and page torn out Mead spiral scholar tablet when he does a show. But that is not here nor there. I believe that there is a “whacko” factor considering third party candidates. They are mainly seen as too radical or too weird to even contemplating voting for. A lot of times there are many eccentric and colorful people running as a third party candidate who perpetuate all third party candidates being nuts. I love the meaning but do not like the word “libertarian”. Most people do not get the word. It sounds like ‘liberal’ or even ‘lesbian’, or something else than what it is. Some Libertarians are basically anarchist whack jobs who do not believe in any kind of government control whatsoever. No need for a driver’s license, car tags, my land is my land. I will pay for the services I use, etc. Some of these people support that the airspace over their property is theirs and think that all airlines violating it needs to pay a fee. (No shit, look it up.) The “throwing away” your vote bit is a bit bullshit. I don’t like the Republicans and Democrats. What am I supposed to do? Stay home or vote for a third party candidate who I know is going to lose? Everyone on the left hates when Ralph Nader runs because basically they claim that he steals votes from the Dem. candidate. Well, for myself, I would much rather vote for Nader over bullshit artists like Gore, Kerry and Obama anyday. I am against Universal Health Care, but I know that Nader would call out the medical community, drug companies, insurance companies and profiteers of the medical racket instead of protecting them. I vote Libertarian. Libertarian candidates get about 400,000 votes versus the 69 million who voted for Obama. I dislike Jesse Ventura because he was someone who could have done an excellent job in Minnesota as governor, served two terms and help foster a new political movement. But Jesse fucked it up. He got a big head and called himself “The Mind” and made ridiculous interviews and speeches, saying once that he wish he was some woman’s underwear or whatever. Then the clown , AS GOVERNOR, was a WWF announcer.:smack: Jesse didn’t want to go for another term, basically because he knew that he would lose and made some lame excuse about his family or something like that. Whatever. He made all third party people look bad. (Jesse, if are out there and want to kick my ass, PM me and we’ll set it up.) Ross Perot is an another good example. When he first announced he was going to run, he was first in the polls. Then the fame of him as a candidate wore thin, he went a bit nuts and decided to call it quits because someone was spying on his daughter’s wedding. The Perot people went WTF? and scattered. Perot after a month of doing nothing and his ugly daughter still married decided to run again. Unfortunately he did not have the momentum like before, although he won 18% of the vote. Perot started the “Reform Party” and opened it up to whoever wants the nomination. A Colorado Governor named Richard Lamm decided to go for it, but he was quickly shut down by Perot. It was like one of those times when you see someone you don’t like but are being polite and tell them upon leaving, “Hey, let’s have lunch sometime.” thinking to be rid of the annoyance, to only see him at your door the next day with a picnic basket. Perot would not run in 2000, which left the Reform Party in the hands of goofballs of all stripes, from Pat Buchanan, Angela Davis (yea, that big haired 70’s Commie black guerilla chick.), and some idiot from Iowa who ran a Maharashi school. The Reform Party was rudderless with people of all political stripes trying to hijack the thing (the old joke, a Neo-Conservative, a Hippie and a Black Female Commie walks into a bar…) Concerning this “tea party” business. It is almost all white. Which is fine. The Mexicans have Al Reza and Atzlan, the blacks have all their groups and this badly named movement is made up of mostly white people. Since it is mostly all white people, the powers that be in the media have dubbed these people “teabaggers” and racists, KKK and all that other garbage. Whites are tired of moving and living two hours away the city because the city is too violent to live in. Whites are tired of all these illegal hispanics and paying them benefits and welfare. Whites are being pushed aside and many of them are pushing back, which is racist. A black or hispanic group doing the same thing would be celebrated as “diversity” by the media. Even today, fluff issues like gay marriage, Lindsey Lohan and some English cunt throwing a cat in a garbage can gets more play than telling us the truth about foreclosures, lost jobs, who is getting rich off our misery and where the fuck our jobs went. The Tea Party seem to be leaderless at this time, basically co-opting the Republican Party instead of trying to strike out on their own. The problem is that the Republicans and Democrats have the cards stacked against independent candidates, or even candidates which buck the “party line” (like Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, men of the opposite side of the galaxy politically). Obama should be some CEO of some business somewhere, coming home to his anonymous wife and their two bratty kids, spending the weekend in the Hamptons. He was going to do that, actually. Some twerp told him he should go into politics. Well, to that guy, once I am finished with Jesse, your next! ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/391 "2010-08-27T09:47:53Z")
> [@Captain\_Midnight](#): > > Concerning this “tea party” business. It is almost all white. Which is fine. The Mexicans have Al Reza and Atzlan, the blacks have all their groups and this badly named movement is made up of mostly white people. Since it is mostly all white people, the powers that be in the media have dubbed these people “teabaggers” and racists, KKK and all that other garbage. They have pretty well demonstrated that they are full of racists. And they themselves named themselves Teabaggers. Perhaps if they weren’t such a collection of fanatics, thugs, idiots and bigots other people might be less inclined to gloat over how they picked such an insulting name for themselves. As it is, tough. > [@Captain\_Midnight](#): > > Whites are tired of moving and living two hours away the city because the city is too violent to live in. Whites are tired of all these illegal hispanics and paying them benefits and welfare. Whites are being pushed aside and many of them are pushing back, which is racist. A black or hispanic group doing the same thing would be celebrated as “diversity” by the media. Even today, fluff issues like gay marriage, Lindsey Lohan and some English cunt throwing a cat in a garbage can gets more play than telling us the truth about foreclosures, lost jobs, who is getting rich off our misery and where the fuck our jobs went. Oh, the poor victimized white man. :rolleyes: Oh, and as it happens I’m a white man. With Hispanic neighbors, who have yet to kill and eat me or whatever it is you think such people do. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 10:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/392 "2010-08-27T10:24:38Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > > [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > > Why don’t you just use the Constitutionally provided means for changing the law, or amending the Constitution? Or is that not convenient to your ideology? > > We have tried that. Try getting anyone in Washington to read the Constitution, let alone bothering to amend it. If we have an out of control, and I would even say tyrannical government, the ability to change the system through normal means disappears. No, you have tried it, but could not get enough support to effect the change you want. You are like the guy who hates the free market because he cannot afford a flat screen TV; you are not owed the change you seek simply because you want it it. You have failed to convince enough people your ideology is just. As the minority opinion, you are not entitled to the change you seek. That is how a republic works. ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/393 "2010-08-27T11:49:42Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Oh, and as it happens I’m a white man. With Hispanic neighbors, who have yet to kill and eat me or whatever it is you think such people do. Have they been “kindly” supplying you with fattening foods? Those people are quite clever. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 11:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/394 "2010-08-27T11:55:33Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > > [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > > In Libertopia, if I peacefully squat on your property and eat your vegetables, is there any shame in that? > > This is an ignorant comment. Of course there is a difference between peacefully protesting government and violating someones property rights. So you stealing from the commons is a noble expression of liberty, but me eating your vegetables is violating your property rights. You really need to stop digging, you are not gaining any converts to your cause with your hypocritical application of an intellectually bankrupt ideology. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 12:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/395 "2010-08-27T12:01:55Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > If we have an out of control, and I would even say tyrannical government, the ability to change the system through normal means disappears. > > After that, Nullification and civil disobedience become reasonable options to bring about change. In other words, if you refuse to sell me your vegetables at the price I want, I am justified in taking them without paying. That is exactly what you are saying. The Constitution is only useful to libertarians until it gets in the way. Your ideology is dangerous, and I will oppose it through any means necessary. And, as an aside, your hysterical use of the word ‘tyranny’ is an insult to all those in the world who have actually suffered under a tyrant. Your continued use of the word just weakens your position. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/396 "2010-08-27T12:03:14Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > Why would you tax the wealthy, other than jealousy? To quote another great economic thinker, “Because that’s where the money is.” ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/397 "2010-08-27T12:12:05Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > > [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > > > What inflation? > > Get the fuck out of here. What inflation? The inflation the Federal Reserve has been creating since its creation. That inflation. The devaluation of the dollar by 96%. Out of curiosity, if a cow cost $5 in 1850, what should it cost now? What should the cost of a computer be, in cow-equivalents? Moo-lah, as it were? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/398 "2010-08-27T12:38:21Z")
**jrodefeld** , you will NOT continue to simply paste in the words of other authors as though you were making a point. Quote relevant (small) sections and then make your own point in your own words. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![blanx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f04885/32.png) [@blanx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blanx)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/399 "2010-08-27T13:35:20Z")
Ok, I get that you believe that what people commonly know as inflation, i.e. a rise in prices, isn’t inflation. In your mind, inflation is an increase in the money supply. So what? If prices do not increase, why should I give a crap whether the money supply is increasing? So what? How does that affect me? And by affect me, I mean, TODAY, not at some nebulous Mayan 2012 date in the future. Please, for the love of the baby Jebus, can your reply not include the words “[mises.org](http://mises.org)”? I’m asking you to tell me, in small words, why the increase in the money supply hurts me? ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [August 27, 2010, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784/400 "2010-08-27T13:38:24Z")
> [@jrodefeld](#): > > I think this is a very sloppy argument. The definitions of Free Markets are abused constantly. Plus you haven’t provided any links to back up what you are talking about. It comes down to the difference between creation of wealth and redistribution of wealth. If governments destroy the incentive to produce and create wealth, they are redistributing a shrinking pie. Everyone gets poorer over the long run. What is wealth exactly? > > Wealth is goods and services desired by individuals. > > To think deeper about it though, businesses have to have a profit to continue doing business. This means providing goods and services to people that they actually want, at a price they want. What is a profit? A profit can be looked at in terms of goods. This means at the end of the day, one has produced more than one has consumed. If you spend all day laboring to produce two loaves of bread, and you eat both loaves of bread the same day, do you have a profit? No, you just have another day to live. If you spend all day laboring and you produce three loaves of bread, and only eat two, you now have an extra loaf of bread with which you can trade with someone else for something else, like a pencil. The next day you do the same thing, now you have two pencils Eventually you get enough pencils to trade for a chair or a piece of silver. Now, if you only produce 1 1/2 loaves of bread a day, eventually, you will starve to death, because you need to produce at least 2 loaves just to stay alive. > > So, the reason governments do not produce wealth, is because they do not have profits. All they have are losses. They always need more money. The reason is twofold. First of all, governments are extremely inefficient. So even if they do produce a good or service that people want, they will do it so inefficiently, that they lose money, and as such, consume wealth by taking from wealth producers to fund their activities (for example, using the bread example, governments will only produce 1 1/2 loaves a day per person). Second of all, many goods and services provided by governments are not desirable. For example, licensing. If governments did not require people to get licenses to do business, no one would. As such, people have to waste their productive efforts buying worthless crap. > > We want wealth to be created to improve the lives of everyone. The Socialist model simply fails in comparison. Please don’t try to lecture me in such a patronizing way about economics. I’ll put my qualifications up against yours any day of the week on that subject. So how about, rather than weaseling, answering what I said. Do you dispute that the Thatcher regime starting in 1979 was a move towards freer markets? If you do, then youhave absolutely no understanding of history or economics, but hey, I’ll at least throw the question out there… If you agree it was, how do you explain given your ‘theories’ that she presided over increases in poverty and inequality, things which you theorized would be eliminated by free markets? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-ones-for-the-obama-loyalists-pay-attention/550784.md?page=21)