Korean Job Discussion Forums

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

Disaster socialism?

Tell us about disaster capitalism first. When you can justify letting capitalism run rampant and unsupervised for a quarter of a century or more, then maybe....and only maybe, can you begin to tell us about some other configuration.

Yes, I understand that you must read some right wing pundit and then repeat the mantra, but if you have an ounce of self-respect, you will read, judge and then admit that your philosophy created the mess. I know it's difficult to admit an error of judgement, but it is only compounding the error to deny it.

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

I have to say, mises, that on Saturday your posts were much different than they have become. I wish I didn't have to say it, but it looks like you had to wait until you read articles telling you how to think.

That's rather sad.

mises · Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

mises · Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired

Accomplished and professional technocrats of any ideological leaning. Paul Volker would be one such example.

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

Back in 1989 to 1991 the Commies saw their world collapse around their ears. Now we are seeing their polar opposites do exactly the same thing. It is sweet.

Ideology is bankrupt.

Once you accept that, you can begin to think for yourself.

Good luck.

mises · Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired

What's my ideology? I offered four very different systems that I think can work. That sure is hard-assed. Recently, I fell into disagreement with Buechon Bum and Kuros because I no longer support anything near free trade. I'm a "libertarian" who supports universal health care. I'm hardly an ideologue.

Back to the OP. With all the massive dept and unfunded liabilities that lie in the path of the American government, do you think it would be wise to add new liabilities to this? That would speak to your ideological inflexibility, not mine.

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

mises · Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired

Dude, where did I blame it on socialism?

mises · Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired

The OP was not about assigning blame for the crises but about how some progressives see the crises as an opportunity to further expand the federal government. Unless current obligations can be met (tax increases and spending decreases) this crises will be nothing compared to the economy grinding to a halt under the weight of the baby boomers needs. Add more obligations to this already huge obligation is not smart.

Unless you can convince the voter that the military budget and empire can be brought down to normal country levels. Then you're probably ok.

Anyways, we you and I agree on is that the cheque has been passed over and over and over again. The whole spend like a big government and tax like a small government game that the right has perfected is really dangerous.

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

mises · Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired

ontheway · Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:39 am Post subject:

There is absolutely not one element of free market failure to be found in the current crisis. The failing financial firms are all victims, raped by the federal reserve and the federal govenment, and now being blamed by the socialists for having let themselves be raped.

The USSR collapsed for the same general reasons that caused the Great Depression, and the current collapse: the general failure of socialism.

And those who understand economics have always considered Bush to be a socialist - a communist/socialist - because he intended to force his common values on others (war on drugs, war on women's right to conrol their bodies, war on personal liberty etc = the major emphasis on the total communist man.)

A free market has:

NO taxes on income or property. (The existence and support of such taxes is socialistic.)

No borrowing, deficits or unfunded spending of any kind allowed by government.

No system of government social security, retirement, health or education.

Either a gold standard, or better, free market competing currencies.

No regulation or licensing of the occupations chosen by the people.

Complete separation from the State of the religious, education, entertainment, medication, and other personal choices of individuals which encompass not only personal liberties, but are an important component in a healthy, vibrant free market.

No regulation either for or against unions and other worker representatives.

No subsidies of any kind for any business.

Recognition that every human being is a free, independent individual and may not be taxed, controlled, regulated, drafted or inhibited in any way in his or her pursuit of life, liberty, property and happiness.

Bush did not support any of these essential components of a free market - because, like it or not, Bush is a socialist.

We are experiencing a pure Socialist collapse.

It is telling that socialists like yata said it couldn't happen, because they have no clue about economics.

Real economists have been predicting this collapse and it has come just as predicted.

Coming next under the socialists, we will see, at best, a decade of recession/depression/stagflation.

The government will use phoney numbers to mislead the ignorant, however, into believing things are better than they are. Just as they have hidden the fact that we have already been in a recession for many months.

However, we are more likely to have a period of hyper inflation, followed by total collapse (and recovery, if we can finally shake off the government) or a lengthy depression (if we can't get the socialists out).

Since the actions of the US socialist government have caused this and overpowered the market, it is still unpredictable, other than that they will fail.

Socialism always fails.

Gopher · Joined: 04 Jun 2005