|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CapnSamwise
Joined: 11 Jan 2010
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:35 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Ron Paul. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Oh, man. that's rich. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| regulation at the personal level. How is Korea surviving the down turn? Not too bad it seems. |
[list=]
Actually, there is a very high degree of regulation at a personal level here in Korea. Have you been here longer than the 2 months it says below your avatar?. If you have been, then you should know better. Ever tried to submit a comment on youtube from the korean site? Buy anyting from a Korean website? Do you know any Korean males who have been drafted?
Thanks to government involvement on a fiscal level, the very thing you say will actually prolong a recession, yes they are weathering the storm better (right now).
Ron Paul? Wow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| regulation at the personal level. How is Korea surviving the down turn? Not too bad it seems. |
[list=]
Actually, there is a very high degree of regulation at a personal level here in Korea. Have you been here longer than the 2 months it says below your avatar?. If you have been, then you should know better. Ever tried to submit a comment on youtube from the korean site? Buy anyting from a Korean website?
Thanks to government involvement on a fiscal level, the very thing you say will actually prolong a recession, yes they are weathering the storm better (right now).
Ron Paul? Wow. |
Korea implemented a relatively small stimulus package compared to the States and the money was allocated mainly for construction projects. This would actually, probably, create growth in the short term (though, is ultimately harmful long term). Where did the US stimulus cash go? Mostly to the bankers who don't actually produce anything.
Either state why you think Ron Paul is a bad politician or stfu. He is far from perfect, but being perfect is hardly an attribute that any other politico has to worry about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CapnSamwise
Joined: 11 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Nah, I think I'll exercise my Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech and mock a ranting little sockpuppet of a man.
Or does that offend your delicate sensibilities? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
| It looks like Libertarians are just going do what you advocate, and try to influence the political discourse with their vote. People like Ron Paul are gaining support and money pretty quick, and the Tea Party movement is a thing. Though the Tea Party cause is pretty much dead in the water right now as they have been co-opted by the GOP. |
Tea Partiers are useful idiots being used as tools by corporatists to raise opposition against bills which hurt corporations and help citizens. That is the extent of their participation in American politics.
| Senior wrote: |
| Many people are pretty pissed off about how the US has turned out. All those things that Libertarians have been predicting for decades are coming to pass, and people are turning to them for answers. |
Here's the thing: a lot of what Libertarians say isn't wrong. They just take it too far. Is the Federal Reserve a foolish, destructive idea? Sure it is. Are massive subsidies market-distorting factors that should be avoided outside of situations where there is real human benefit gained in return for said distortions and the resulting inefficiencies? Of course. Are wars of discretion a totally idiotic idea that only hurt the country engaging in them (outside of very specific corporate interests)? They are indeed. Are massive handouts to parasitic banks completely insane? Yes. These things and more are truths that come out of the mouths of Libertarians, and they're the kinds of things responsible for our predicament. The solution to that is to fix those specific problems, not to go over-board and strip government down to the bare bones. Instituting Libertarianism in response to poor governmental policy is like instituting Communism in response to tyranny: it's a gross over-reaction that's only going to cause suffering.
| Senior wrote: |
| Libertarians built the US. Why should they have to leave? |
Libertarians did not build the U.S. The "founding fathers" were not libertarians. Libertarians would have written strict prohibitions against governmental involvement into the Constitution. The people who built this nation were proponents of moderate, reasonable government. They could have made the U.S. into a strictly Libertarian society, but they didn't, and with good reason.
| Senior wrote: |
| EDIT: Oh yea, one more thing. What do you call moving to Korea? Korea is quite Libertarian in a lot of ways. Lower taxes, less social services, less regulation at the personal level. How is Korea surviving the down turn? Not too bad it seems. |
Korea isn't Libertarian in any real sense at all. Korea is a place where all major corporations receive government assistance. Korea is a place where corporate CEOs are openly and explicitly exempt from legal reprocussion. Many aspects of Korean life are subsidized by the government. Korea is substantially lower than the United States on the economic freedom index Sergio posted in the last thread on Libertarianism (United States is 8th and listed as "mostly free," Korea is 31st and listed as "moderately free."). Korea has a socialized, mandatory national health service. Korea subsidizes reproduction. Korea practices mandatory conscription. Korea is decidedly unlibertarian by any reasonable measure. Any praise for Korea is praise for socialism; you're actively arguing against your own case at this point.
Last edited by Fox on Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd be curious to hear about a politician more financially savvy than Paul. He alone not only predicted the financial melt-down but also identified its cause -- long ago.
Simply because he disagrees with the mainstream doesn't make him a quack. He is a bit like Ruppert in that regard. Think of him as a financial Ruppert who predicted financial resource collapse.
Insulting a public servant of the US an argument does not make. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| It looks like Libertarians are just going do what you advocate, and try to influence the political discourse with their vote. People like Ron Paul are gaining support and money pretty quick, and the Tea Party movement is a thing. Though the Tea Party cause is pretty much dead in the water right now as they have been co-opted by the GOP. |
Tea Partiers are useful idiots being used as tools by corporatists to raise opposition against bills which hurt corporations and help citizens. That is the extent of their participation in American politics. |
Unfortunately, this is all too true. They can just as easily be co-opted for Libertarian purposes.
| Quote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Many people are pretty pissed off about how the US has turned out. All those things that Libertarians have been predicting for decades are coming to pass, and people are turning to them for answers. |
Here's the thing: a lot of what Libertarians say isn't wrong. They just take it too far. Is the Federal Reserve a foolish, destructive idea? Sure it. Are massive subsidied market-distorting factors that should be avoided outside of situations where there is real human benefit gained in return for said subsidies? Of course. Are wars of discretion a totally idiotic idea that only hurt the country engaging in them (outside of very specific corporate interests)? They are indeed. Are massive handouts to parasitic banks completely insane? Yes. These things and more are truths that come out of the mouths of Libertarians, and they're the kinds of things responsible for our predicament. The solution to that is to fix those specific problems, not to go over-board and strip government down to the bare bones. Instituting Libertarianism in response to poor governmental policy is like instituting Communism in response to tyranny: it's a gross over-reaction that's only going to cause suffering. |
To instantly strip away the govt edifice would be a self defeating action from a hypothetical Libertarian govt. Fixing the problems you stated, and then slowly cutting back govt spending would probably be what I personally would advocate. Pulling the whole thing down and starting from scratch would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.
| Quote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| Libertarians built the US. Why should they have to leave? |
Libertarians did not build the U.S. The "founding fathers" were not libertarians. Libertarians would have written strict prohibitions against governmental involvement into the Constitution. The people who built this nation were proponents of moderate, reasonable government. They could have made the U.S. into a strictly Libertarian society, but they didn't, and with good reason.
|
What ever the case is, I'm sure the founding fathers didn't have the current situation in mind. Though I'm sure they probably envisioned that it might happen over time.
| Quote: |
| Senior wrote: |
| EDIT: Oh yea, one more thing. What do you call moving to Korea? Korea is quite Libertarian in a lot of ways. Lower taxes, less social services, less regulation at the personal level. How is Korea surviving the down turn? Not too bad it seems. |
Korea isn't Libertarian in any real sense at all. Korea is a place where all major corporations receive government assistance. Korea is a place where corporate CEOs are openly and explicitly exempt from legal reprocussion. Many aspects of Korean life are subsidized by the government. Korea is substantially lower than the United States on the economic freedom index Sergio posted in the last thread on Libertarianism (United States is 8th and listed as "mostly free," Korea is 31st and listed as "moderately free."). Korea has a socialized, mandatory national health service. Korea subsidizes reproduction. Korea practices mandatory conscription. Korea is decidedly unlibertarian by any reasonable measure. Any praise for Korea is praise for socialism; you're actively arguing against your own case at this point. |
[/quote]
Probably a pretty hard sell. I was thinking of a few examples, without looking at the big picture. Lower taxes, street vendors, not really that much else.
You might be able to argue that liberty is improving in Korea. But, I'm not going to try and do that here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
To instantly strip away the govt edifice would be a self defeating action from a hypothetical Libertarian govt. Fixing the problems you stated, and then slowly cutting back govt spending would probably be what I personally would advocate. Pulling the whole thing down and starting from scratch would be throwing the baby out with the bath water.
|
Well, this is a totally reasonable approach to take. I just think the end results would stop short of what most Libertarians describe, and end very moderately.
| Senior wrote: |
| What ever the case is, I'm sure the founding fathers didn't have the current situation in mind. Though I'm sure they probably envisioned that it might happen over time. |
They did envision at least some of it; Thomas Jefferson for one has some very famous quotes on record regarding corporations, for example. He -- like many progressives -- saw exactly how destructive corporations have the potential to be to society. He also saw the problems regarding banks being allowed to handle the issue of money, which is something that should give him some credit with Libertarians.
Last edited by Fox on Wed Feb 17, 2010 2:18 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 2:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
| I'd be curious to hear about a politician more financially savvy than Paul. He alone not only predicted the financial melt-down but also identified its cause -- long ago. |
He's very financially savvy. The primary problem with Ron Paul in my eyes is the same problem many people with a strong understanding of economics face: the tendency to reduce everything to economics and forget about the real humans involved. Generally they justify this reduction by appealing to liberty; by labelling freedom the most important virtue, they can construct a case wherein we don't even have to actually consider human well being, and are justified in focusing purely on the economic aspects of the situation.
For obvious reasons, anyone who thinks that liberty is not the single paramount virtue that Libertarians would construe it as will view Ron Paul skeptically. I think he's got a lot of wisdom to dispense, but he just takes things too far. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| .38 Special wrote: |
| I'd be curious to hear about a politician more financially savvy than Paul. He alone not only predicted the financial melt-down but also identified its cause -- long ago. |
He's very financially savvy. The primary problem with Ron Paul in my eyes is the same problem many people with a strong understanding of economics face: the tendency to reduce everything to economics and forget about the real humans involved. Generally they justify this reduction by appealing to liberty; by labelling freedom the most important virtue, they can construct a case wherein we don't even have to actually consider human well being, and are justified in focusing purely on the economic aspects of the situation.
For obvious reasons, anyone who thinks that liberty is not the single paramount virtue that Libertarians would construe it as will view Ron Paul skeptically. I think he's got a lot of wisdom to dispense, but he just takes things too far. |
I can agree partially with this. Were Ron Paul to apply his views in an interventionist state... well, things would be bizarre, very much so!
Paul's ideals stem from the concept of federation (something that once meant something very important in this country) whereby the state does not consider the humanity of its citizens intentionally. That is the duty of the member states. The federal government (which is where this usage comes from) only settles disputes. For humanitarian reasons, specific law concerning rights would be invoked and studied in the courts or discussed in the legislature. Otherwise, the member state was one's major government for nearly everything but foreign relations and member state dispute settlement (for most of the Old Republic, the idea of a standing army was vilified no less than Communism today). The powers of the federal government were to be impartial, petitioned only by and through the unfeeling, unbribable, unbiased color of law ... or so the myth of the American Republic is known.
Alas, no such place exists post-Civil War. Arguably it died with Jackson. Such a state is inconceivable today where governments behave as partially democratic monarchies, casting bias and favors with every billion-dollar turn of their heads, but it was a fine experiment in politics while it lasted. Adherents to and advocates of the Old Republic still exist today, as impractical dinosaurs though we may be. 
But such is life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Senior wrote: |
Korea implemented a relatively small stimulus package compared to the States and the money was allocated mainly for construction projects. This would actually, probably, create growth in the short term (though, is ultimately harmful long term). Where did the US stimulus cash go? Mostly to the bankers who don't actually produce anything.
Either state why you think Ron Paul is a bad politician or stfu. He is far from perfect, but being perfect is hardly an attribute that any other politico has to worry about. |
You claimed government tampering only makes recessions worse, and now you need to throw a smoke screen and re-qualify it (incorrectly). It isn't the first time you've done this, and it isn't the first time you've been mistaken about the details behind your claims.
All the way from chemicals in recycling, to this thread when you said street vendors are not regulated; you continually speak without correct knowledge of the subject .
But, about Paul, if I had known this is where your perspective originated from at the start, it could have saved us both from all this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| crescent wrote: |
| Senior wrote: |
Korea implemented a relatively small stimulus package compared to the States and the money was allocated mainly for construction projects. This would actually, probably, create growth in the short term (though, is ultimately harmful long term). Where did the US stimulus cash go? Mostly to the bankers who don't actually produce anything.
Either state why you think Ron Paul is a bad politician or stfu. He is far from perfect, but being perfect is hardly an attribute that any other politico has to worry about. |
Look, you claimed government tampering only makes recessions worse, and now you need to throw a smoke screen and re-qualify what you said. It isn't the first time you've done this, and it isn't the first time you've been mistaken about the details behind your claims.
All the way from chemicals in recycling, to this thread when you said street vendors are not regulated; you continually speak without correct knowledge of the subject .
But, about Paul, it revealed your perspsective and why you leave things out of the equation. |
Nothing about what I said changed. Stimulus makes recessions worse. That is pretty plain to see. In Korea's case they pumped money into construction and "green" initiatives. This will put people to work straight away and make the recession seem not as bad. But you would expect that to happen. In the long term it makes the problem worse because all that is happening is either A) work that would have been done anyway, is brought into the present B) work that no one really wanted is performed which means that capital will have been under-utilised, and therefore wasted.
Finally, I don't see how me admiring an unpopular political figure reveals why I sometimes err in my assertions about small facts. The regulations on street vendors obviously isn't so onerous, and enforced so strictly, as to drive the vendors out of business, as is the case in our home countries. In our home countries the permits and health, safety, environment, noise, sexual harassment, tax, worker, on and on regulations you have to adhere to before you can set up shop, make it near impossible to do business. What is "stimulating" about that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crescent
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: yes.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, i rewrote my post before you quoted me, but no big deal.
I didn't say your political hero caused you to omit FACTS. I said it causes you to overlook variables in your argument.
Korea has been screwing with the money supply, and indulging in restrictive regulations. Do you think this country is economically one of the freest?
http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking.aspx
I drew attention to street vendors because you though they were unregulated. I made that point simply because it was one thing in the list of inaccuracies you presented.
Last edited by crescent on Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
.38 Special
Joined: 08 Jul 2009
Location: Pennsylvania
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Poor Ron Paul. He is so terribly misunderstood and abused. If I could hug him I would. Ole G. W. could use a hug these days, too. 
But oh well. No one here pretends to be an expert on anything (although some may be expert EFL teachers). No one here is a master of the debating arts, and everyone makes mistakes.
No need to attack each other when civil, controlled, and forgiving argument is so much more desirable 
C'mon folks, Kumbayah with me here!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Senior
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| .38 Special wrote: |
Poor Ron Paul. He is so terribly misunderstood and abused. If I could hug him I would. Ole G. W. could use a hug these days, too.
But oh well. No one here pretends to be an expert on anything (although some may be expert EFL teachers). No one here is a master of the debating arts, and everyone makes mistakes.
No need to attack each other when civil, controlled, and forgiving argument is so much more desirable
C'mon folks, Kumbayah with me here! |
Say what! Who asked for your opinion? Gosh  G. W.? George Washington? What are you talking about? Everyone knows he wouldn't have hugged you if his wooden teeth were on fire. I'm an expert on everything (except esl teaching), so why don't you just understand that I know more about this topic than you and leave at that, and shut up, and go to hell? Kumbayah with a monkey's ass baboon brain. Good grief where do they find these people? times infinity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
