Greatest thread to human civilization : capitalist greed - Stephen Hawkin

[Mac1958]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

 

[The Rabbi]

In fact modern capitalism will improve people's lot over mercantile capitalism. Asian economies lean toward mercantile capitalism at the expense of their low-wage-earning citizens.

Nope,
Merchantilist policies and protectionism play a very important role while an economy is in development. The US and GB were extremely protectionist before they were fully developed nations.

Also wrong. Protectionism is a losing proposition always and everywhere.

I don't think a country could get away with grabbing their ankles with a no protection policy. But restricting exports is definitely preferred to restricting imports.

Your first three words are correct. The rest, not so much.
Protectionism is simply a cheat of the consumer to the benefit of the business owner. No nation ever protected itself into prosperity.

US strategic reserve policy is fundamental to our prosperity. It's how we have useful money, low energy cost and why we're not selling our crude to Europe, even if they wanted it. How's the no protections history in your country/planet?

I see what US "prosperity" has been recently. You can keep it.

 

[Programmer]

Nope,
Merchantilist policies and protectionism play a very important role while an economy is in development. The US and GB were extremely protectionist before they were fully developed nations.

Also wrong. Protectionism is a losing proposition always and everywhere.

I don't think a country could get away with grabbing their ankles with a no protection policy. But restricting exports is definitely preferred to restricting imports.

Your first three words are correct. The rest, not so much.
Protectionism is simply a cheat of the consumer to the benefit of the business owner. No nation ever protected itself into prosperity.

US strategic reserve policy is fundamental to our prosperity. It's how we have useful money, low energy cost and why we're not selling our crude to Europe, even if they wanted it. How's the no protections history in your country/planet?

I see what US "prosperity" has been recently. You can keep it.

That was a quick surrender to reality. Thanks for the play.

 

[The Rabbi]

Idiots. It is amazing how some of the smartest people can be so dumb.
Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than anything else. IT's benefits are literally without precedence.

Hawkins has facts you could never accept on his side.
Capitalism prior to the 1980s was great but then things changed, facts back it up.
Offshoring jobs started and wage growth flattened out for most workers, both started in the 1980's. Down the road wealth/income inequality followed. Find me economist that dispute this other than your typical hyper-partisan economists, even most of them agree with facts from the real world.

So any economist that dsputes this is ipse facto a "hyper partisan". LOL! What a fucking tool bag.
Did you forget the growth in the 90s under Clinton, piggybacking on Reagan's success? Did you forget the stagflation in the 70s thanks to Carter and Nixon? For that matter did you forget the Depression in the 1930s, when everyone said capitalism was doomed? Or the prosperity in the 1920s?
You have a simple mind so to you everything is simple.

This simple mind chased you away every time we have had this discussion.
The last time we interacted, I provided links to a highly regarded resource and guaranteed I was 100% correct. You never responded or in other words you ran away.
If my simple mind does this to you consistently, what does that say about you?
It's always the same with you and I guarantee, you are inferior to me.

Translation: I dont have the chops for this discussion.
No, you really dont. Better to declare victory and run away than face the facts. Post a graph, why dontcha?

Amazingly, that's what you are known for, " declaring victory and running away from facts". It's your own M.O.! I have seen you getting accused of that over and over.
What an idiot!

I get accused of that by ignorant pricks who cannot read charts and post claptrap.

 

[The Rabbi]

Also wrong. Protectionism is a losing proposition always and everywhere.

I don't think a country could get away with grabbing their ankles with a no protection policy. But restricting exports is definitely preferred to restricting imports.

Your first three words are correct. The rest, not so much.
Protectionism is simply a cheat of the consumer to the benefit of the business owner. No nation ever protected itself into prosperity.

US strategic reserve policy is fundamental to our prosperity. It's how we have useful money, low energy cost and why we're not selling our crude to Europe, even if they wanted it. How's the no protections history in your country/planet?

I see what US "prosperity" has been recently. You can keep it.

That was a quick surrender to reality. Thanks for the play.

Surrender? You misspelled "dismissal."
You do not know what "US strategic reserve policy" is. You do not understand how or even if it relates to protectionism. You cannot define "useful money" (as opposed to?). You assert "low energy cost" without any meaningful comparison. You drag in the oil export ban as an example of protectionism. Hint: Protectionism restricts IMPORTS,not Exports.
You are an utter and complete failure because you regurgitate terms and words you heard on Maddow or something and think you understand what they are. And also think you can win some debate by invoking them, like a magic spell.
Your bullshit is way too painfully obvious.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Your definition of socialism is yours alone.

Taxpayers pay for the uninsured and did so well before the passage of the PPACA. That you don't understand that simple fact is proof positive you too are clueless.

It involves redistribution of wealth and that is a major tenet of socialism. Try looking it up.

I understand that taxpayers paid for it before. It was wrong then. Since Obamacare did nothing to change that fact, what good did it do to solve the problem of one person being forced to support another? Like I said, if you aren't willing to voluntarily do what you say is OK to force others to do, that's proof you're nothing more than a loud mouth bleeding heart good for nothing.
Tell me why taxpayers should be forced to fund healthcare for anyone? What's wrong with those of you who say someone that doesn't have getting it funding it yourself?

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

So your morals are OK to force on others?

My morals? You don't get it at all. Callous disregard for the poor, aged, young and invalid is by its very nature immoral. It's not my morals, it was true and old when Socrates walked on the earth.

 

[Programmer]

I don't think a country could get away with grabbing their ankles with a no protection policy. But restricting exports is definitely preferred to restricting imports.

Your first three words are correct. The rest, not so much.
Protectionism is simply a cheat of the consumer to the benefit of the business owner. No nation ever protected itself into prosperity.

US strategic reserve policy is fundamental to our prosperity. It's how we have useful money, low energy cost and why we're not selling our crude to Europe, even if they wanted it. How's the no protections history in your country/planet?

I see what US "prosperity" has been recently. You can keep it.

That was a quick surrender to reality. Thanks for the play.

Surrender? You misspelled "dismissal."
You do not know what "US strategic reserve policy" is. You do not understand how or even if it relates to protectionism. You cannot define "useful money" (as opposed to?). You assert "low energy cost" without any meaningful comparison. You drag in the oil export ban as an example of protectionism. Hint: Protectionism restricts IMPORTS,not Exports.
You are an utter and complete failure because you regurgitate terms and words you heard on Maddow or something and think you understand what they are. And also think you can win some debate by invoking them, like a magic spell.
Your bullshit is way too painfully obvious.

You've given up. Clearly our strategic reserves are trade protections that have underpinned prosperity in the US. Of course protection can include exports. It is in US law as such, and part of our energy and monetary policy.

 

[Conservative65]

It involves redistribution of wealth and that is a major tenet of socialism. Try looking it up.

I understand that taxpayers paid for it before. It was wrong then. Since Obamacare did nothing to change that fact, what good did it do to solve the problem of one person being forced to support another? Like I said, if you aren't willing to voluntarily do what you say is OK to force others to do, that's proof you're nothing more than a loud mouth bleeding heart good for nothing.
Tell me why taxpayers should be forced to fund healthcare for anyone? What's wrong with those of you who say someone that doesn't have getting it funding it yourself?

Your ideological beliefs are not in concert with the vast majority of our citizens; that you are a loud and proud callous conservatives is your right, but it is morally indefensible.

I'm not surprised a bunch of socialist aren't willing to admit what they support is socialist.

If a vast majority of people said 2 + 2 = 5, does that make it so?

It's not morally defensible to force one person to support another yet you defend it daily?

Socialism has saved civilization. Socialism has reined in capitalism. That had to be done.

So your morals are OK to force on others?

My morals? You don't get it at all. Callous disregard for the poor, aged, young and invalid is by its very nature immoral. It's not my morals, it was true and old when Socrates walked on the earth.

Like I said, if you see a need that you believe should be met, meet it by reaching into your own pocket. When you start making the determination of how I should see things, it's pushing your morals on me. I don't have a problem helping someone where I see the need. My problem is when you think you should determine who it is on my behalf. When you start doing that, it becomes your morals dictated on me.

 

[The Rabbi]

Your first three words are correct. The rest, not so much.
Protectionism is simply a cheat of the consumer to the benefit of the business owner. No nation ever protected itself into prosperity.

US strategic reserve policy is fundamental to our prosperity. It's how we have useful money, low energy cost and why we're not selling our crude to Europe, even if they wanted it. How's the no protections history in your country/planet?

I see what US "prosperity" has been recently. You can keep it.

That was a quick surrender to reality. Thanks for the play.

Surrender? You misspelled "dismissal."
You do not know what "US strategic reserve policy" is. You do not understand how or even if it relates to protectionism. You cannot define "useful money" (as opposed to?). You assert "low energy cost" without any meaningful comparison. You drag in the oil export ban as an example of protectionism. Hint: Protectionism restricts IMPORTS,not Exports.
You are an utter and complete failure because you regurgitate terms and words you heard on Maddow or something and think you understand what they are. And also think you can win some debate by invoking them, like a magic spell.
Your bullshit is way too painfully obvious.

You've given up. Clearly our strategic reserves are trade protections that have underpinned prosperity in the US. Of course protection can include exports. It is in US law as such, and part of our energy and monetary policy.

Your post does not account for the Wackernagel Effect or Moore's Law in calculating ballistic coefficients off the meplat.
SOrry. That's a fail, son.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

Examples of "promoting socialism" seem to be missing. Please elucidate with examples.

 

[Mac1958]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

Examples of "promoting socialism" seem to be missing. Please elucidate with examples.

Uh. Bernie Sanders promotes it. His supporters promote it. It's promoted here.

Post 415, for example.

Is this a trick question?
.

 

[Weatherman2020]

“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed.” Hawking continued, “Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality."

We have been warned.

Stephen Hawking Warns About The Greatest Threat To Humanity | Zero Hedge

Interesting that a guy who is alive today only because of capitalism is so dumb and naive. He needs to stick to physics. And go to Venezuela to enjoy some socialized medicine.

 

[Wry Catcher]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

Examples of "promoting socialism" seem to be missing. Please elucidate with examples.

Oh, and I would like someone to detail how the private for profit sector is always better, cheaper and more effective than a government agency.

 

[Conservative65]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

Examples of "promoting socialism" seem to be missing. Please elucidate with examples.

Oh, and I would like someone to detail how the private for profit sector is always better, cheaper and more effective than a government agency.

The private, for profit sector must constantly look out for waste. If they have a lot of waste, it cuts into their profit. A government agency only needs a politician to push for more funding and raising taxes to provide more money. A business can raise prices but only to a point. If the government raises taxes, what option do people have but pay them. For example, if the local school district wants more money, they raise the millage rate to get more money and it comes in property taxes. If you don't pay those property taxes, even if you own the property, it can be taken.

 

[boedicca]

Oh P'Shaw!

The biggest threats to Human Civilization are Skynet and Kanamits.

 

[Mac1958]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

Examples of "promoting socialism" seem to be missing. Please elucidate with examples.

Oh, and I would like someone to detail how the private for profit sector is always better, cheaper and more effective than a government agency.

Sometimes they can, sometimes they can't. But there are many who believe, as a philosophical matter, in the individual more than the federal bureaucracy.
.

 

[jillian]

Its so amusing to see posters on a message board calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. He is the Einstein of our age.

He is right of course. I would add all the rest is just talk as Global Warming is the one thing we will not stop and have never seen before. Physics and chemistry are about to decide which species survive the next mass extinction, which has already begun, and which will go gone. Humans will likely suffer massive losses and if not go extinct come perilously close.

The worst part is most humans don't have a clue about what is coming and soon to arrive. Much like the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

Something wicked this way comes.

Ya. I was struck by that, too. What I will say is if one believes that the world can be a better place, and one knows the history of unfettered capitalism, then intelligent people would acknowledge that capitalism needs to be tempered... tempered by wage and hour laws; tempered by child labor laws; tempered by OSHA regulations; tempered by laws preventing monopolies.

ony people who are very ignorant or who have no sense of social responsibility think that capitalism should be unfettered. so it isn't surprising that Stephen hawking, someone who has spent his life studying the way our world works, would understand some of that. I don't know how far he goes in those beliefs though. It's an interesting discussion to have.... well, except when one has it with people who are so ignorant that they fancy themselves smarter than Stephen hawking.

 

[Programmer]

US strategic reserve policy is fundamental to our prosperity. It's how we have useful money, low energy cost and why we're not selling our crude to Europe, even if they wanted it. How's the no protections history in your country/planet?

I see what US "prosperity" has been recently. You can keep it.

That was a quick surrender to reality. Thanks for the play.

Surrender? You misspelled "dismissal."
You do not know what "US strategic reserve policy" is. You do not understand how or even if it relates to protectionism. You cannot define "useful money" (as opposed to?). You assert "low energy cost" without any meaningful comparison. You drag in the oil export ban as an example of protectionism. Hint: Protectionism restricts IMPORTS,not Exports.
You are an utter and complete failure because you regurgitate terms and words you heard on Maddow or something and think you understand what they are. And also think you can win some debate by invoking them, like a magic spell.
Your bullshit is way too painfully obvious.

You've given up. Clearly our strategic reserves are trade protections that have underpinned prosperity in the US. Of course protection can include exports. It is in US law as such, and part of our energy and monetary policy.

Your post does not account for the Wackernagel Effect or Moore's Law in calculating ballistic coefficients off the meplat.
SOrry. That's a fail, son.

You've been knocked out and you're swinging at nursing staff next week.

 

[Programmer]

It really has been fascinating to watch during Obama's term, as the hardcore Left has become FAR more comfortable with defending and promoting socialism.

His administration really has been a turning point.
.

Examples of "promoting socialism" seem to be missing. Please elucidate with examples.

I think the rise of the republican crazies spawned the democrat crazies.

 

[The Rabbi]

Its so amusing to see posters on a message board calling Stephen Hawking an idiot. He is the Einstein of our age.

He is right of course. I would add all the rest is just talk as Global Warming is the one thing we will not stop and have never seen before. Physics and chemistry are about to decide which species survive the next mass extinction, which has already begun, and which will go gone. Humans will likely suffer massive losses and if not go extinct come perilously close.

The worst part is most humans don't have a clue about what is coming and soon to arrive. Much like the dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

Something wicked this way comes.

Ya. I was struck by that, too. What I will say is if one believes that the world can be a better place, and one knows the history of unfettered capitalism, then intelligent people would acknowledge that capitalism needs to be tempered... tempered by wage and hour laws; tempered by child labor laws; tempered by OSHA regulations; tempered by laws preventing monopolies.

ony people who are very ignorant or who have no sense of social responsibility think that capitalism should be unfettered. so it isn't surprising that Stephen hawking, someone who has spent his life studying the way our world works, would understand some of that. I don't know how far he goes in those beliefs though. It's an interesting discussion to have.... well, except when one has it with people who are so ignorant that they fancy themselves smarter than Stephen hawking.

And the site's Number 2 Poseur chimes in with crap she knows nothing about.
Hint: Stephen Hawking has not spent his life studying how our world works. He is a physicist, not an economist, historian, or sociologist.