Yes I have. Look it up, you will find it. I cannot predict when hyperinflation will come.
One compelling argument (of many) is below:
How Hyperinflation Will Happen:
[ third complete text of copyrighted material deleted ]
Read the rest here: How Hyperinflation Will Happen | Seeking Alpha
Who gives a shit about this issue? I didn’t come here to defend the Tea Party. I am not a member. I make a small remark that, in my experience the protests I have seen were much more diverse than what is being reported. That is all.
Why continue to bring up this meaningless bullshit? If the Tea Party was 40% black, would that change your views of the policy suggestions? If it would, you are incredibly shallow and superficial. If not, then the point is irrelevant.
And then you hand wave the rest of them away. The free markets and gold standard of the 1800’s were an economic disaster which you have utterly failed to address.
You have learned a made up fairy tale version of history as it relates to the Great Depression. Hoover did everything that Roosevelt did. He was just as much of an interventionist. Read this:
Now here is a fascinating study from UCLA about the folly of FDR’s New Deal policies:
There you go. Read the following Austrian School perspectives on this matter:
This is a common misconception about The Great Depression that is taught to people in schools today. It must be refuted based on the facts.
Are you fucking retarded or something? Only a fool would claim that Greenspan, excepting his youth, was anywhere close to a libertarian or Austrian School follower. The Austrian School is against the existence of a Federal Reserve, yet you think a Fed chairman could be a follower? The purpose of the Fed is to intervene in the marketplace, artificially setting interest rates.
Ron Paul, by the way, opposed Bernanke from the very beginning. He oppose Ronald Reagan and called him a traitor and a complete failure. And he certainly didn’t support Bush I, Clinton or Bush II. You really need to get your facts straight.
The Austrian School advocates and true libertarians have opposed all economic policies of our government for decades. They have never had any allegiance to the Republican Party. I know its comforting for you to narrow anything down to a partisan war, but that is simplistic and doesn’t apply to the principled advocates of economic liberty.
Surely 3,185 words spread over four and a half single spaced pages don’t exceed “fair use” standards. To say nothing about Post 424.
Sigh.
TLDR. Again.
I’m just sayin’…
In the interests of fighting ignorance, you are dead wrong about this. Some strains of flu (for instance the one responsible for the 1917 pandemic) use the body’s immune system against itself, and are more deadly to those with good immune systems versus those with weak ones. In fact it spread initially in the US in army bases full of healthy, young recruits. If you think being healthy gives you immunity from this kind of flu, and do not get vaccinated, you are putting your life at risk. My wife who is a biologist and medical writer wrote and sold a book on the flu, which didn’t get published because the avian flu stubbornly refused to become a major epidemic.
BTW, that flu was called the Spanish flu because the countries engaged in The Great War suppressed information on the extent of the outbreak, fearing it would make them seem weak. When it spread to Spain, which was neutral, the news got out.
You could definitely learn a thing or two about competing currencies. I don’t blame you for not understanding it, most people have never given it any thought.
Legalize Competing Currencies
By Ron Paul:
And this:
Competing currency being accepted across Mid-Michigan:
by Dan Armstrong
Right on.
Shoot, and here I just posted something correcting your ignorance about the flu, ignorance which could be life threatening.
Where did I claim that Greenspan was a follower of the Austrian school? Of course not - no Austrian could ever pass Congress to be Fed Chairman. Those who know anything would be laughing too hard to vote. I also never claimed he was a pure libertarian, but he certainly had those tendencies, resisting regulation of the mortgage industry even as it spun out of control. And care to support Paul’s claim? In your own words please, not with 20 paragraph cut and pastes.
Paul opposing Bernanke shows what a moron Paul is. Bernanke is an expert on the Depression and responses to the Depression, which is damn lucky. I know you support letting the economy fall into a depression which would have caused untold hardship to untold millions to maintain the fiction that government can’t help, but luckily those in power feel some degree of responsibility to the people of the United States. Even Bush stepped back and supported what was right, even against the rabid right wing of his party, and it is one of the things I respect him for.
As for Paul calling Regan a traitor, that just shows that the guy shouldn’t be in a Committee room, he should be in a rubber room.
I’m sure that no True Scotsman would join the Republicans either.
Or to be less subtle; whether you like to admit it or not, factions at least of the Republicans have again and again tried to push libertarian extreme free market fantasies into reality; in post conquest Iraq for example. Our occupation government slashed the ability of what passed for the Iraqi government to regulate or tax, and forbade any government attempt to begin rebuilding the government; under the theory that the Free Market would solve everything and turn Iraq into a capitalist paradise. What then happened in Iraq pretty much demonstrates why you don’t want to admit it; Iraq failed to turn into the free market paradise the libertarians expected and collapsed into a hellhole even worse than directly after the fighting. Companies did not rush in to do the work the free marketeers forbade the government from doing, nor did Iraq become wealthy and prosperous by letting foreigners own its resources and infrastructure against its will. Not only did the magic free market fail to do a better job than the government, it did nothing of use at all.
I don’t suppose you noticed that your second quote utterly discredited the first one? We don’t need to legalize contradicting currencies, because -guess what?- They’re already legal. You can’t make your new junk look like an impersonation of US coins (they should also not be similar enough in size and shape to fool vending machines), but if you don’t do that, you can sell and accept trade of anything that anyone is willing to barter with you. This is already true. To bad that Ron Paul is too ignorant of economics, the market, and reality to realize this, as you yourself just proved (with a cite!).
Or perhaps your/his problem is that the US hasn’t forced all vendors to accept gold and silver as legal tender? You want to buy a candy bar with a gold coin? How small a coin? If I wanted to run a garage sale, would I have to have a precisely accurate scale to weigh your gold shavings? What foolishness.
I will also note that nothing in what you posted even attempted to refute anything I said. No possible explanation for this is complimentary to you. Though they do make the balls you show in coming in and claiming that I lack understanding of competing currencies especially ironic. Excrutiatingly so.
When come back (and you apparently will), do try and bring less fail. And quote people with less fail too.
I will add, for all this competing currency stuff, do you want to respect the government’s right to not accept your competing currencies when you pay your taxes? Just because you’re willing to accept payment in live chickens doesn’t mean the government wants them.
This is, of course, assuming that you don’t just want the government and police and courts and the like to work for you for free. Which it wouldn’t surprise me to hear you say. Heck, it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that you hope to use this “competing currency” business as a way to dodge taxes – it wouldn’t surprise me at all.
How can you be so sure that you yourself have not been utterly brainwashed? If you are going to throw out such accusations, you have to be prepared to defend the inevitable riposte.
The third time is the charm.
jrodefeld, you refused to pay attention the first two times that I told you to follow board policy regarding copyright, so this is a Warning that you are not to C&P an entire page.
Go back and read the Registration agreement regarding copyright and Fair Use. If you cannot find a way to post such information in your own words, then you have no business, here, anyway.
[ /Moderating ]
That is prohibited in Great Debates and this is a Warning that you are out of line.
[ /Moderating ]
I will end this thread with this: Some of you have your dollars and some of you have your gold.
When the shit hits the fan, I will be the king of the world. Know why?
I have a shitload of TOOLS.
What can you do with gold and dollars? Nothing. I can build you shelter. I can create electrical power. I can bring transportation back. I can make liquor. I can provide food.
I can use your dollars as fuel to forge your gold into practical items for survival.
I am a Toolitarian! Join with me! Page one (of three) of my manifesto will be available soon for a small fee. Dollars or gold are acceptable for payment.
Somebody doesn’t like Digital Equipment computers?? Oh, you mean anti-vaccination! 
Blame me for this. In a previous manifesto OP declared that any compulsory vaccination program was wrong. I didn’t consider vaccination to be an important issue, but thought that it would be a good example to refute the more extreme forms of libertarianism. But no matter how much we discussed this, OP never grasped that society forces his kids to be vaccinated in order to protect my kids. But now he pretends he knew that all along.
Similarly he wrote “Keynesians like deficits” or some such gibberish, and now revises this to “Kenesians like deficits during recessions.”
I hope OP reads this and learns that to foster an impression of intelligence, one must take the time to think and write carefully.
An interesting way to put it.
Influenza is in fact a deadly contagious disease. Of the laboratory-confirmed deaths in the EU, for example, close to one-third of the fatalities occurred in previously healthy people, including young adults who may have felt they were immortal. In any case, influenza vaccine is not mandatory except for people in certain occupations, i.e. health care workers (and exemptions widely exist here as well).
Why do you not comprehend that a huge part of the reason we no longer have epidemics of polio, measles, rubella etc. is that they’ve been prevented by widespread mandatory immunization? Of course you’re not alone in having this blind spot (if one can call it that). For example, pediatrician Jay Gordon (Jenny McCarthy’s pediatrician, who often writes antivax articles) argues that the incidence of preventable infectious diseases is so low that it doesn’t make sense to vaccinate. Guess why the incidence is low, Jay?
Extensive safety studies and long-term followup research on outcomes of vaccination have been conducted (go to PubMed to look them up, or consult authoritative websites like the vaccine information center of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia). The “long term effects” of mass immunization are a lot of babies and children who’ve grown up to be healthy adults, instead of dying or suffering permanent injury from serious infectious diseases.
Because it’s bankrupt conspiratorial thinking. Drug companies and docs could make more money in the treatment of millions of sick kids. Hospitalization and I.C.U. stays run up big bills. By your logic, the Medical Establishment should be fighting vaccination tooth and nail to protect their profits. Except that they’re fighting to keep children healthy.
Yes. And you need to learn about the immune response, and how vaccines use killed and weakened pathogens to produce immunity that thwarts real infection.
I went to some trouble here to refute your inescapable vaccine logic :dubious: because it forms a significant part of why intelligent people reject Ron Paul. We figures that anyone (a doctor, no less) who is so appallingly ignorant in his own field and espouses a drastic weakening of a hugely successful public health initiative, cannot be trusted in other areas and be elected to lead our country. He’s not only extreme, he’s extremely wrong.
Now you may attack the above as “cherry-picking” and return to the glorious example of Austrian Economics.
Well, yeah I at least appreciate the effort to actually read what I wrote, although I resent you referring to it as “hooey”. I really hope you at some point intend to elaborate on what you found so objectionable.
As for the Tea Party people at large, I think you paint with way too broad of a brush. There are certainly backwards, uneducated rednecks out there. I don’t speak for them. Every single rally or group of people I have talked to have been very different from the media narrative.
How many Tea Party people have you spoken to? Have you attended any rallies or events? Like I said earlier, my goal is not to defend the Tea Party. I am providing the philosophic arguments of the intelligent opposition (not necessarily Tea Party) for you to deal with. Now, if you can continue to label anyone who is protesting the policies of the Obama administration as a bigoted racist, you are not forced to think and defend these policies. The ideas I have expressed here are pervasive in the political circles I travel in.
You should really try to broaden your horizons a bit and see people as individuals, rather than as members of groups. The sad thing about political action is that you need to join with people who disagree with you on certain issues to get anything accomplished. There are wildly differing views from Tea Party to Tea Party. There are educated members, ignorant members, old, young, etc. I disagree with many of the Tea Party people.
But, yes, there are a growing number of people who do understand Austrian economic theories, monetary policy, the constitution, and advocate a different foreign policy. I am speaking for these people, whether they belong to a Tea Party or not.
This is the criticism and views you should be addressing.
Of course it was justified to use the force of government to prevent continuation of slavery and pursue human justice after the Civil War. You are absolutely correct that we are becoming much more tolerant as a society over the last half century or so. This is fantastic. You are absolutely wrong that it was because the government forced everyone to be tolerant. It happened because people became more educated about different cultures, the media and the internet exploded allowing for people to become more enlightened. Most racism and bigotry are simply hateful forms of ignorance, based on not knowing about another group and assuming that all people who share superficial physical characteristics think and act alike. Our world has gotten smaller and the knowledge we have of different cultures around the globe has expanded drastically.
But the government always brings up racial issues and divisions to advance a political goal. There are good arguments to be made that things like Affirmative Action actually prevent us from moving beyond race and breeds resentment. Issues that, for the most part, we have moved beyond, the media will dig them up and stir the pot once again created animosity among groups. You really don’t think that if we said that abortion and gay marriage are no business of the federal government, it wouldn’t lead to more tolerance, given that neither side would be afraid that the other would force their beliefs or sweeping social policies on the entire country? If more of these issues were accepted to be local government functions, it would help tremendously.
There will still be assholes, racists, and people who simply will not let these issues alone. Yet, that segment of the population will be weakened and not given a national voice in our political discourse.
As for the debate in California, I have heard these ridiculous arguments against Prop 8. But who do you think fans the flames of this issue? The media. Why should they give voice to every crazy Christian fundamentalist? The media probably has at least as much to do with breading intolerance and hostility than the actual government policies. I hope Prop 8 is defended and more states follow suit.
That has been a problem from the beginning of time. No, we can’t make sure poor and rich have access to the same caliber attorneys. But the judicial system can be fair. There is so much corruption in government and our systems of “justice” so often protect the criminals. I know the way I phrased the issue made it seem much simpler than it really is to implement and enforce, but if we eliminate corporatism and separate the state and its functions from business (establishing a truly free economy), the businessman would have no pull with the government. It will never be perfect but the goal of equal justice is something we should always strive for.