|
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 |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| chellovek wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
^ Oh, silly me for not realizing you speak for the "rest of the thinking world"...
I especially love the way you describe economic life as being "far too complex", basically confirming what I already knew: that you know precisely jack-shit about any of it. And yet you still offer your "conclusion" that none of it is applicable. Typical.
The rest is just an obvious straw man. I guess there's not much left to debate about. |
I'm guessing you're just pulling more of that 'lol'bertarian crap on me |
Nope, I'm really saying that people don't know anything about economics shouldn't pretend to know more about it than other people, nor should they be dismissive. Rather than trying to sound clever all the time, why not offer something of substance? And by substance, I mean evidence, not sophistry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| chellovek wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
^ Oh, silly me for not realizing you speak for the "rest of the thinking world"...
I especially love the way you describe economic life as being "far too complex", basically confirming what I already knew: that you know precisely jack-shit about any of it. And yet you still offer your "conclusion" that none of it is applicable. Typical.
The rest is just an obvious straw man. I guess there's not much left to debate about. |
I'm guessing you're just pulling more of that 'lol'bertarian crap on me |
Nope, I'm really saying that people don't know anything about economics shouldn't pretend to know more about it than other people, nor should they be dismissive. Rather than trying to sound clever all the time, why not offer something of substance? And by substance, I mean evidence, not sophistry. |
..but I can debate economics with you. I've laid out my position. I think Libertarianism is mistaken and misplaced in the modern world.
I also enjoy that you implicitly assume that because I'm not playing to your tune that I don't understand economics. Boy do I have a wee joker up my sleeve later on (at least based on your idea of 'understanding' stuff). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chellovek wrote: |
..but I can debate economics with you. I've laid out my position. I think Libertarianism is mistaken and misplaced in the modern world.
I also enjoy that you implicitly assume that because I'm not playing to your tune that I don't understand economics. Boy do I have a wee joker up my sleeve later on (at least based on your idea of 'understanding' stuff). |
You haven't laid out a position... You've merely made the baseless assertion that free market economics doesn't work; yet you haven't actually explained why or provided any examples. You did briefly mention that land prices were cheaper in the past, but didn't go into any detail about how that is relevant (no doubt because you don't actually have any clue whether it's really relevant or not, and aren't up to the task of explaining how).
Anyway, if you want to get into an economics debate, go ahead and state your position. Support it with facts and evidence. People like myself, ontheway, and a few others on here will be happy to set you straight. 
But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| chellovek wrote: |
..but I can debate economics with you. I've laid out my position. I think Libertarianism is mistaken and misplaced in the modern world.
I also enjoy that you implicitly assume that because I'm not playing to your tune that I don't understand economics. Boy do I have a wee joker up my sleeve later on (at least based on your idea of 'understanding' stuff). |
You haven't laid out a position... You've merely made the baseless assertion that free market economics doesn't work; yet you haven't actually explained why or provided any examples. You did briefly mention that land prices were cheaper in the past, but didn't go into any detail about how that is relevant (no doubt because you don't actually have any clue whether it's really relevant or not, and aren't up to the task of explaining how).
Anyway, if you want to get into an economics debate, go ahead and state your position. Support it with facts and evidence. People like myself, ontheway, and a few others on here will be happy to set you straight.
But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics. |
Eh? You are the one laying out a position. Namely, Libertarianism is a viable way forward. I deny that it is so, based on what I've said. I've asserted that I think your political/economic model isn't up to the task. I think your model is simplistic and flawed. You can ad hominem me to death, but the onus is on you to show that your ideology is workable.
As I've stated at least 2 or 3 times now, I simply don't believe Libertarianism offers a way forward. I think it's hopelessly stuck in a pre-inudstrial past. That is my opinion. It is your ilk that seems eager to shut down discussion and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. From your end I've heard nothing yet but I'm stupid. If this is the Libertarian mode of debate, then come back corporatism, all is forgiven. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I sympathize with your position. I do. I do not believe libertarianism/classical liberalism is a cure. Our disease is not government but secularism. I'm agnostic some days and atheist on others so this is problematic for me, to say the least.
In the absence of God, or a nation centred around an idea of God, humans have come to worship the state as a God. All problems are fixed with "social programs". Who governs is reduced to a popularity contest with two or three groups spending hoards of money to convince the drooling masses that they've got the right mix of "social programs" that we need to "move forward". I do not believe this to be an improvement over an anti-democratic priestly aristocracy. This is the source of our decline. That said, I do not want to live in a Christian/Catholic/Orthodox society. So, here we are. Libertarians will never - ever - ever - ever make meaningful advances in a society that has replaced the worship of God with the worship of the state. You're fighting a battle you can not possibly win. God does not hand back power. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| chellovek wrote: |
..but I can debate economics with you. I've laid out my position. I think Libertarianism is mistaken and misplaced in the modern world.
I also enjoy that you implicitly assume that because I'm not playing to your tune that I don't understand economics. Boy do I have a wee joker up my sleeve later on (at least based on your idea of 'understanding' stuff). |
You haven't laid out a position... You've merely made the baseless assertion that free market economics doesn't work; yet you haven't actually explained why or provided any examples. You did briefly mention that land prices were cheaper in the past, but didn't go into any detail about how that is relevant (no doubt because you don't actually have any clue whether it's really relevant or not, and aren't up to the task of explaining how).
Anyway, if you want to get into an economics debate, go ahead and state your position. Support it with facts and evidence. People like myself, ontheway, and a few others on here will be happy to set you straight.
But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics. |
If you're interested in knowing about land prices and progress, consult Adam Smith, proceeding roughly from page 750 in The Wealth of Nations. I'm drawing most of that extra from him. He seems pretty much in line with free market thinking. However, don't let that get in the way of some ad hominems if the opportunity comes up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 3:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| chellovek wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| chellovek wrote: |
..but I can debate economics with you. I've laid out my position. I think Libertarianism is mistaken and misplaced in the modern world.
I also enjoy that you implicitly assume that because I'm not playing to your tune that I don't understand economics. Boy do I have a wee joker up my sleeve later on (at least based on your idea of 'understanding' stuff). |
You haven't laid out a position... You've merely made the baseless assertion that free market economics doesn't work; yet you haven't actually explained why or provided any examples. You did briefly mention that land prices were cheaper in the past, but didn't go into any detail about how that is relevant (no doubt because you don't actually have any clue whether it's really relevant or not, and aren't up to the task of explaining how).
Anyway, if you want to get into an economics debate, go ahead and state your position. Support it with facts and evidence. People like myself, ontheway, and a few others on here will be happy to set you straight.
But, I'm guessing you're just more interested in pretending to know what you're talking about (so you can look clever) than in actually discussing economics. |
Eh? You are the one laying out a position. Namely, Libertarianism is a viable way forward. I deny that it is so, based on what I've said. I've asserted that I think your political/economic model isn't up to the task. I think your model is simplistic and flawed. You can ad hominem me to death, but the onus is on you to show that your ideology is workable.
As I've stated at least 2 or 3 times now, I simply don't believe Libertarianism offers a way forward. I think it's hopelessly stuck in a pre-inudstrial past. That is my opinion. It is your ilk that seems eager to shut down discussion and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. From your end I've heard nothing yet but I'm stupid. If this is the Libertarian mode of debate, then come back corporatism, all is forgiven. |
I'm sorry I'm reduced to this, but I'm not sure you understand how things work. I can't sleep without at least trying.
YOU assert that Libertarianism is a workable model.
I deny this, because Libertarianism is clearly simplistic bollocks.
The onus is on YOU to lay out a coherent and logical position that satisfactorily answers the questions of outsiders like me.
Your position is that of proving a POSITIVE- Libertarianism works. I'm merely a skeptic. It is not my job to prove a NEGATIVE- i.e. I don't think Libertarianism is appropriate. (If you catch where this going now, along the lines of logical discussion..)
I don't need to lay out a position because I haven't tied myself to an ideology like you have. You have clearly pinned yourself to the idea that Libertarianism is good. I'm calling bullshit on you. Prove me wrong.
Prove. Me. Wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see. You make the positive claim that free market economics is not workable or a solution to our problems, and the onus is on me to prove your assertion wrong? That sort of thing smacks of intellectual cowardice/laziness to me. Rather than making excuses, why don't you just admit you're not up to the task of backing your claim?
Rather than "calling bullshit", why don't you step up to the plate and offer some alternatives? I frankly couldn't care less about "converting" you to libertarianism, and I'm certainly not here to indulge you. If you want to debate, then put something on the table. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| | |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
