Warren and the Divine Right of Capital: Accountable Capitalism Act

[Grumblenuts]

Be sure to request the payor's name on the person's paycheck who finally answers when you try to call Healthcare.gov next time.. oh, and ask for their address..

 

[daveman]

But you never post anything of substance, so that makes it hard. There's nothing to respond to, other than your dickhead persona.

And how are the Toddster and ShootEmUpDave doing here lately on that score?

You wouldn't know. You keep posting that idiotic meme whenever you see my posts.

 

[dblack]

"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."

No, it doesn't. It means keeping government interference in individual lives as minimal as possible.

Look, I know that's a scary concept to leftist totalitarians, but damn...there is no way you can call this man intelligent.

He's a moron.

He's trying to suggest that the rejection of government bullying equates to an endorsement of corporate bullying. But, like most liberals, he skips over the part where corporate bullying is implement by the government.

 

[daveman]

"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."

No, it doesn't. It means keeping government interference in individual lives as minimal as possible.

Look, I know that's a scary concept to leftist totalitarians, but damn...there is no way you can call this man intelligent.

He's a moron.

He's trying to suggest that the rejection of government bullying equates to an endorsement of corporate bullying. But, like most liberals, he skips over the part where corporate bullying is implement by the government.

And in some cases -- mandated.

"If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep your healthcare plan."

 

[Flash]

It is amazing how these stupid Moon Bats use convoluted reasoning to justify the greed of socialism.

Of course Liberals don't know any more about Economics as they know about History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

 

[dblack]

"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."

No, it doesn't. It means keeping government interference in individual lives as minimal as possible.

Look, I know that's a scary concept to leftist totalitarians, but damn...there is no way you can call this man intelligent.

He's a moron.

He's trying to suggest that the rejection of government bullying equates to an endorsement of corporate bullying. But, like most liberals, he skips over the part where corporate bullying is implement by the government.

And in some cases -- mandated.

Yeah. That's what I mean. Corporations have no power to bully us unless they enlist government to help them.

 

[daveman]

It is amazing how these stupid Moon Bats use convoluted reasoning to justify the greed of socialism.

Of course Liberals don't know any more about Economics as they know about History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

“I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

― Thomas Sowell

 

[Flash]

Image search - "healthcare.gov headquarters" - just look at all that gubmint!

It's nuts isn't it? Look at all those images!

Be sure and report any suspected INSURANCE FRAUD you see out there like a good little boy!

I'll be happy to report all the government corruption and fraud.

 

[Flash]

It is amazing how these stupid Moon Bats use convoluted reasoning to justify the greed of socialism.

Of course Liberals don't know any more about Economics as they know about History, Climate Science, Biology, Ethics or the Constitution.

“I have never understood why it is "greed" to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.”

― Thomas Sowell

The root of socialism is greed and envy, mostly greed.

It is a despicable immoral economic model that has failed to some degree or another no matter where it has been implemented.

If you want to piss off a greedy asshole Liberal just suggest "I'll pay my bills and you pay yours, mmkay?" They will call you racist or something to suggest that.

 

[georgephillip]

What at Trump vs. Warren 2020 showdown would mean for the U.S. dollar

"But both Trump and Warren contend an overly strong dollar hurts U.S. competitiveness..."

"Trump has made his displeasure with the dollar’s persistent strength relative to other major currencies clear on Twitter and elsewhere, even prompting fears of a return to unilateral intervention in currency markets, despite assurances by White House officials that such actions were off the table.

"Warren, in outlining what she calls her 'plan for economic patriotism', wrote that the U.S. government 'should consider a number of tools and work with other countries harmed by currency misalignment to produce a currency value that’s better for our workers and our industries.'"

Which candidate likely has a better understanding of Macroeconomics?

George Conway on Twitter

/----/ So some former professor knows more about business than the billionaire who is also the most powerful man in the world. Yeah, Spanky.

So some former professor knows more about business than the billionaire who is also the most powerful man in the world. Yeah, Spanky

Trump owes all his "success" to an accident of birth:

"In Donald J. Trump’s version of how he got rich, he was the master dealmaker who parlayed an initial $1 million loan from his father into a $10 billion empire. It was his guts and gumption that overcame setbacks, and his father, Fred C. Trump, was simply a cheerleader.

"But an investigation by The New York Times shows that by age 3, Donald Trump was earning $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father’s empire.

"He was a millionaire by age 8.

"By the time he was 17, his father had given him part ownership of a 52-unit apartment building.

"Soon after he graduated from college, he was receiving the equivalent of $1 million a year from his father."

Chomsky, not so much.

4 Ways Fred Trump Made Donald Trump and His Siblings Rich

George Conway is a fat nobody-don't humor him with mentions

George Conway is a fat nobody-don't humor him with mentions

Impeach him too.

Giuliani Associate Says He Gave Demand for Biden Inquiry to Ukrainians

"Not long before the Ukrainian president was inaugurated in May, an associate of Rudolph W. Giuliani’s journeyed to Kiev to deliver a warning to the country’s new leadership, a lawyer for the associate said.

"The associate, Lev Parnas, told a representative of the incoming government that it had to announce an investigation into Mr. Trump’s political rival, Joseph R. Biden Jr., and his son, or else Vice President Mike Pence would not attend the swearing-in of the new president, and the United States would freeze aid, the lawyer said."

Too much winning?

Yes-time to dump Trump AND every DEMoCRAT in Washington!

Yes-time to dump Trump AND every DEMoCRAT in Washington!

FLUSH the DC toilet?

Solid gold toilet worth $1M and titled 'America' stolen from palace where Churchill was born

 

[georgephillip]

Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela

"In our paper, 'Sanctions as Collective Punishment: The Case of Venezuela,' we looked at some of the ways in which the sanctions on Venezuela imposed by the US government curtail access to essential and life-saving imports, and some of the data on impacts such as mortality. We concluded that US economic sanctions since August 2017 have likely caused a dire rise in mortality and a grave aggravation of Venezuela’s economic crisis"

So let's have a lesson in "Lies, damned lies, and statistics.".

Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.

But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.

Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.

Charting The Decline Of Venezuela's Oil Industry

During that time Chavez fired 19,000 oil workers, and replaced them with loyalists to his government. Loyal to Chavez, but not experienced in the oil industry.
In 2007 with the rise of prices, the oil companies operating in Venezuela, began increasing production. Instead of enjoying the added income, Chavez demanded more money from oil, and the companies refused. He then expropriated their assets by force.

Now understand why.... Venezuela's oil is heavy crude, which is super difficult to refine. Thus it requires tons and tons of capital investment. That's why the government of Venezuela invited foreign investment to begin with, because their oil is difficult to deal with, and extremely expensive to refine.

Chavez, expropriated their assets, which of course made all the companies abandon the investing in the country. (why would you invest, if the government just steals it?). Not only that, but Chavez diverted all that money to his social programs, which made him popular, but.... without capital investment, it was impossible to maintain oil production on extremely difficult heavy crud oil that Venezuela produces.

As a result oil production in the US, was increasing year over year, during the exact same time that Venezuela's production was falling year over year.

View attachment 289236

View attachment 289237

So looking at 2009 on... you can see that US production went up even though oil prices were falling. And equally Venezuela's production was going down.

Even if you could say that the sanctions hurt exports, which they clearly have.... that doesn't explain why production has fallen.
Even if you can't export the oil.... they could use that oil to keep the lights on in Venezuela. In a country that has nation wide black outs, certainly having a few diesel generators keeping the power on would be a wise use of the vast oil wealth in the country.

I mean after all, isn't it the left-wing that constantly complains that the US steals the resources of other countries? Well here's a case where the country can keep the resource for themselves. So why don't they produce more oil for their own use?

Again, because Chavez stole all the capital investment money, and spent it on social programs. So as the NPR reported, even their existing investments have fallen into disrepair.

The Fallout From A Seemingly Sweet Oil Deal For Venezuela's Neighbors

There are a several reasons for this. First, Venezuela oil industry is in turmoil. Venezuela's oil rigs, which had been producing nearly 3 million barrels of crude a day in 2014, are now producing just a fraction of that.

Much of the oil that they are extracting is now going straight on to tankers bound for Russia or China to pay off Venezuela's debts to those countries.​

So notice, existing oil rigs, that used to produce 3 million barrels a day, are not producing very little. Capitalist investment is vital in all industry. If you take away the profits..... the industry dies. This is why socialism the world over has failed.

However, it is true that US Sanctions do hinder the oil industry.

But you need to also understand exactly why the US did this. We have clear documented proof, that the state run oil company in Venezuela, is being used by those in power, to load up off shore banks accounts.

The money from the oil exports isn't going to feed people anyway. We already know this for a fact. The companies endless corruption, and Maduro cronies moving cash out of the country, has not been used to help the poor.

This idea that somehow if sanctions didn't exist, that money would flow to stock the shelves is ridiculous, especially given that food shortages started before the sanctions did.

Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.

But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.

Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.

What definition of "screwed" are you using?

Did you notice the sources?
What motives would OPEC or USEIA have in screwing the results?
Venezuelan oil production declines from 2368 to 1235.
Colombian production falls from 1015 to 866.
What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?

Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela

"Santos begins with a graph from our paper that shows both Venezuelan and Colombian oil production on the left and right-hand axes, respectively, in thousands of barrels per day, from 2013 to 2018.

"Both are fairly constant on average (with Colombian production much more volatile) until January of 2016; they then decline at about the same rate until August of 2017, when President Trump issued an executive order imposing broad financial sanctions on Venezuela.

"Venezuelan oil production then falls at three times the rate that it had been falling since January 2016."

What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?

Socialists not investing in infrastructure.

What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?

Socialists not investing in infrastructure.

MAGA mucho?
Putin takes control of Venezuela oil as Trump plan to crush Maduro’s communist state fails

 

[georgephillip]

Yep. Not to mention nitpicking over stuff recently said by (an amazingly still sharp but nonetheless) ninety year old. And finding a token black guy for backup, LOL. All leftists though, discussing world affairs at a high level. Anything noticeably missing?

If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.

He's a linguist. You may as well ask Sean Penn his views on geopolitics.

Oh, wait -- you idiots did that, too.

He's a linguist. You may as well ask Sean Penn his views on geopolitics.

Oh, wait -- you idiots did that, too.

"Main article: Noam Chomsky bibliography and filmography

"Linguistics

• Syntactic Structures (1957)
• Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (1964)
• Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965)
• Cartesian Linguistics (1965)
• Language and Mind (1968)
• The Sound Pattern of English with Morris Halle (1968)
• Reflections on Language (1975)
• Lectures on Government and Binding (1981)
• The Minimalist Program (1995)

"Politics

• American Power and the New Mandarins (1969)
• Counter-Revolutionary Violence: Bloodbaths in Fact & Propaganda with Edward S. Herman (1973)
• The Political Economy of Human Rights (1979)
• Towards a New Cold War (1982)
• The Fateful Triangle (1983)
• Pirates and Emperors (1986)
• Manufacturing Consent (1988)
• Necessary Illusions (1989)
• Deterring Democracy (1991)
• Letters from Lexington (1993)
• The Prosperous Few and the Restless Many (1993)
• World Orders Old and New (1994)
• Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship (1997)

• Profit over People (1999)
• 9-11 (2001)
• Understanding Power (2002)
• Middle East Illusions (2003)
• Hegemony or Survival (2003)
• Getting Haiti Right This Time (2004)
• Imperial Ambitions (2005)
• Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy (2006)
• Interventions (2007)
• Gaza in Crisis (2010)
• Making the Future (2012)
• Occupy (2012)
• Requiem for the American Dream (2017)"

Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia

 

[Third Party]

/----/ So some former professor knows more about business than the billionaire who is also the most powerful man in the world. Yeah, Spanky.

So some former professor knows more about business than the billionaire who is also the most powerful man in the world. Yeah, Spanky

Trump owes all his "success" to an accident of birth:

"In Donald J. Trump’s version of how he got rich, he was the master dealmaker who parlayed an initial $1 million loan from his father into a $10 billion empire. It was his guts and gumption that overcame setbacks, and his father, Fred C. Trump, was simply a cheerleader.

"But an investigation by The New York Times shows that by age 3, Donald Trump was earning $200,000 a year in today’s dollars from his father’s empire.

"He was a millionaire by age 8.

"By the time he was 17, his father had given him part ownership of a 52-unit apartment building.

"Soon after he graduated from college, he was receiving the equivalent of $1 million a year from his father."

Chomsky, not so much.

4 Ways Fred Trump Made Donald Trump and His Siblings Rich

George Conway is a fat nobody-don't humor him with mentions

George Conway is a fat nobody-don't humor him with mentions

Impeach him too.

Giuliani Associate Says He Gave Demand for Biden Inquiry to Ukrainians

"Not long before the Ukrainian president was inaugurated in May, an associate of Rudolph W. Giuliani’s journeyed to Kiev to deliver a warning to the country’s new leadership, a lawyer for the associate said.

"The associate, Lev Parnas, told a representative of the incoming government that it had to announce an investigation into Mr. Trump’s political rival, Joseph R. Biden Jr., and his son, or else Vice President Mike Pence would not attend the swearing-in of the new president, and the United States would freeze aid, the lawyer said."

Too much winning?

Yes-time to dump Trump AND every DEMoCRAT in Washington!

Yes-time to dump Trump AND every DEMoCRAT in Washington!

FLUSH the DC toilet?

Solid gold toilet worth $1M and titled 'America' stolen from palace where Churchill was born

First put Pelosi's head in it

 

[georgephillip]

Some of my earliest conversations with conservatives took place over a half century ago.

That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.

That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.

By "liberal" you mean..?

Liberalism - Wikipedia

"Over time, the meaning of the word liberalism began to diverge in different parts of the world.

"According to the Encyclopædia Britannica: "'n the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal programme of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies'"

In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away.

In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away

Liberalism has many flavors:

Liberalism - Wikipedia

"The diversity of liberalism can be gleaned from the numerous adjectives that liberal thinkers and movements have attached to the very term 'liberalism', including classical, egalitarian, economic, social, welfare state, ethical, humanist, deontological, perfectionist, democratic and institutional, to name a few.[37]

"Despite these variations, liberal thought does exhibit a few definite and fundamental conceptions.

"At its very root, liberalism is a philosophy about the meaning of humanity and society."

What's "the meaning of humanity and society"?

For liberalism, humanity is pushed aside in favor of society. And liberty is not given any consideration at all.

Remember, California criminalized plastic straws to save the planet.

For liberalism, humanity is pushed aside in favor of society. And liberty is not given any consideration at all.

Why do conservatives hate humanity?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela

"In our paper, 'Sanctions as Collective Punishment: The Case of Venezuela,' we looked at some of the ways in which the sanctions on Venezuela imposed by the US government curtail access to essential and life-saving imports, and some of the data on impacts such as mortality. We concluded that US economic sanctions since August 2017 have likely caused a dire rise in mortality and a grave aggravation of Venezuela’s economic crisis"

So let's have a lesson in "Lies, damned lies, and statistics.".

Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.

But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.

Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.

Charting The Decline Of Venezuela's Oil Industry

During that time Chavez fired 19,000 oil workers, and replaced them with loyalists to his government. Loyal to Chavez, but not experienced in the oil industry.
In 2007 with the rise of prices, the oil companies operating in Venezuela, began increasing production. Instead of enjoying the added income, Chavez demanded more money from oil, and the companies refused. He then expropriated their assets by force.

Now understand why.... Venezuela's oil is heavy crude, which is super difficult to refine. Thus it requires tons and tons of capital investment. That's why the government of Venezuela invited foreign investment to begin with, because their oil is difficult to deal with, and extremely expensive to refine.

Chavez, expropriated their assets, which of course made all the companies abandon the investing in the country. (why would you invest, if the government just steals it?). Not only that, but Chavez diverted all that money to his social programs, which made him popular, but.... without capital investment, it was impossible to maintain oil production on extremely difficult heavy crud oil that Venezuela produces.

As a result oil production in the US, was increasing year over year, during the exact same time that Venezuela's production was falling year over year.

View attachment 289236

View attachment 289237

So looking at 2009 on... you can see that US production went up even though oil prices were falling. And equally Venezuela's production was going down.

Even if you could say that the sanctions hurt exports, which they clearly have.... that doesn't explain why production has fallen.
Even if you can't export the oil.... they could use that oil to keep the lights on in Venezuela. In a country that has nation wide black outs, certainly having a few diesel generators keeping the power on would be a wise use of the vast oil wealth in the country.

I mean after all, isn't it the left-wing that constantly complains that the US steals the resources of other countries? Well here's a case where the country can keep the resource for themselves. So why don't they produce more oil for their own use?

Again, because Chavez stole all the capital investment money, and spent it on social programs. So as the NPR reported, even their existing investments have fallen into disrepair.

The Fallout From A Seemingly Sweet Oil Deal For Venezuela's Neighbors

There are a several reasons for this. First, Venezuela oil industry is in turmoil. Venezuela's oil rigs, which had been producing nearly 3 million barrels of crude a day in 2014, are now producing just a fraction of that.

Much of the oil that they are extracting is now going straight on to tankers bound for Russia or China to pay off Venezuela's debts to those countries.​

So notice, existing oil rigs, that used to produce 3 million barrels a day, are not producing very little. Capitalist investment is vital in all industry. If you take away the profits..... the industry dies. This is why socialism the world over has failed.

However, it is true that US Sanctions do hinder the oil industry.

But you need to also understand exactly why the US did this. We have clear documented proof, that the state run oil company in Venezuela, is being used by those in power, to load up off shore banks accounts.

The money from the oil exports isn't going to feed people anyway. We already know this for a fact. The companies endless corruption, and Maduro cronies moving cash out of the country, has not been used to help the poor.

This idea that somehow if sanctions didn't exist, that money would flow to stock the shelves is ridiculous, especially given that food shortages started before the sanctions did.

Look at the chart you posted. It looks as though Colombian oil production closely matches Venezuelan production. That the two were following the same pattern.

But then notice the range. The Venezuelan oil production goes from 1200 barrels to 2400 barrels. The range is 1200. The Colombian range goes from 500 to 1000. A range of 500. So they screwed with the ranges to make the two graphs fit together.

Moreover, when you look at the actual decline in oil production, the real start of the decline was around 2003 to 2007.

What definition of "screwed" are you using?

Did you notice the sources?
What motives would OPEC or USEIA have in screwing the results?
Venezuelan oil production declines from 2368 to 1235.
Colombian production falls from 1015 to 866.
What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?

Economists Use “Fuzzy Graphs” to Challenge Data on the Human Cost of Trump Sanctions on Venezuela

"Santos begins with a graph from our paper that shows both Venezuelan and Colombian oil production on the left and right-hand axes, respectively, in thousands of barrels per day, from 2013 to 2018.

"Both are fairly constant on average (with Colombian production much more volatile) until January of 2016; they then decline at about the same rate until August of 2017, when President Trump issued an executive order imposing broad financial sanctions on Venezuela.

"Venezuelan oil production then falls at three times the rate that it had been falling since January 2016."

What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?

Socialists not investing in infrastructure.

What explains the divergence between the two curves over 2017 to 2018 if not Trump's sanctions?

Socialists not investing in infrastructure.

MAGA mucho?
Putin takes control of Venezuela oil as Trump plan to crush Maduro’s communist state fails

Maduro, the only fat person in Venezuela.

What an asshole.

 

[georgephillip]

Yep. Not to mention nitpicking over stuff recently said by (an amazingly still sharp but nonetheless) ninety year old. And finding a token black guy for backup, LOL. All leftists though, discussing world affairs at a high level. Anything noticeably missing?

If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.

To be fair, it's not really fair. They only run on gas.

"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."

No, it doesn't. It means keeping government interference in individual lives as minimal as possible.

Look, I know that's a scary concept to leftist totalitarians, but damn...there is no way you can call this man intelligent.

He's a moron.

"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."

No, it doesn't. It means keeping government interference in individual lives as minimal as possible.

Chomsky recognizes there are other greater threats to individual liberty than that posed by a democratic government:

On "Private Tyrannies" | Ben O'Neill

"If you have ever read much of the political philosophy and commentary of renowned anarchosyndicalist intellectual Noam Chomsky, then you are probably familiar with his view that large private business organizations are 'private tyrannies' — oversized and antidemocratic institutions that function according to that most hated of organizational principles, the hierarchy! According to Chomsky,

"As state capitalism developed into the modern era, economic, political and ideological systems have increasingly been taken over by vast institutions of private tyranny that are about as close to the totalitarian ideal as any that humans have so far constructed.[1]"

 

[Grumblenuts]

".gov"

The name is derived from the word government, indicating its restricted use by government entities. The gov domain is administered by the General Services Administration (GSA), an independent agency of the United States federal government.
Actual use: United States government; formerly ...
TLD type: Sponsored top-level domain
Intended use: Governmental entities
.gov - Wikipedia

healthcare.gov - fraud or no?

 

[daveman]

Yep. Not to mention nitpicking over stuff recently said by (an amazingly still sharp but nonetheless) ninety year old. And finding a token black guy for backup, LOL. All leftists though, discussing world affairs at a high level. Anything noticeably missing?

If I'm remembering correctly, Chomsky was at one time the most frequently quoted scholar in academic journals. He was the only living academic to be quoted often enough to make the all time top ten list of thinkers quoted in those journals, but, of course, conservatives know better.

He's a linguist. You may as well ask Sean Penn his views on geopolitics.

Oh, wait -- you idiots did that, too.

He's a linguist. You may as well ask Sean Penn his views on geopolitics.

Oh, wait -- you idiots did that, too.

"Main article: Noam Chomsky bibliography and filmography

"Linguistics

• Syntactic Structures (1957)
• Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (1964)
• Aspects of the Theory of Syntax (1965)
• Cartesian Linguistics (1965)
• Language and Mind (1968)
• The Sound Pattern of English with Morris Halle (1968)
• Reflections on Language (1975)
• Lectures on Government and Binding (1981)
• The Minimalist Program (1995)

"Politics

• American Power and the New Mandarins (1969)
• Counter-Revolutionary Violence: Bloodbaths in Fact & Propaganda with Edward S. Herman (1973)
• The Political Economy of Human Rights (1979)
• Towards a New Cold War (1982)
• The Fateful Triangle (1983)
• Pirates and Emperors (1986)
• Manufacturing Consent (1988)
• Necessary Illusions (1989)
• Deterring Democracy (1991)
• Letters from Lexington (1993)
• The Prosperous Few and the Restless Many (1993)
• World Orders Old and New (1994)
• Objectivity and Liberal Scholarship (1997)

• Profit over People (1999)
• 9-11 (2001)
• Understanding Power (2002)
• Middle East Illusions (2003)
• Hegemony or Survival (2003)
• Getting Haiti Right This Time (2004)
• Imperial Ambitions (2005)
• Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy (2006)
• Interventions (2007)
• Gaza in Crisis (2010)
• Making the Future (2012)
• Occupy (2012)
• Requiem for the American Dream (2017)"

Noam Chomsky - Wikipedia

Yeah, looks like he started believing his own bullshit pretty early on.

 

[daveman]

That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.

That was back when liberals (some of them at least) still cared about individual rights.

By "liberal" you mean..?

Liberalism - Wikipedia

"Over time, the meaning of the word liberalism began to diverge in different parts of the world.

"According to the Encyclopædia Britannica: "'n the United States, liberalism is associated with the welfare-state policies of the New Deal programme of the Democratic administration of Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, whereas in Europe it is more commonly associated with a commitment to limited government and laissez-faire economic policies'"

In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away.

In America, liberalism is the opposite of individual liberty. It's complete government control of people based on their demographics. Individualism is discouraged, and liberty is legislated away

Liberalism has many flavors:

Liberalism - Wikipedia

"The diversity of liberalism can be gleaned from the numerous adjectives that liberal thinkers and movements have attached to the very term 'liberalism', including classical, egalitarian, economic, social, welfare state, ethical, humanist, deontological, perfectionist, democratic and institutional, to name a few.[37]

"Despite these variations, liberal thought does exhibit a few definite and fundamental conceptions.

"At its very root, liberalism is a philosophy about the meaning of humanity and society."

What's "the meaning of humanity and society"?

For liberalism, humanity is pushed aside in favor of society. And liberty is not given any consideration at all.

Remember, California criminalized plastic straws to save the planet.

For liberalism, humanity is pushed aside in favor of society. And liberty is not given any consideration at all.

Why do conservatives hate humanity?

YOU CAN ONLY BE AN INDIVIDUAL WHEN YOU'RE A FACELESS PART OF A POLITICAL DEMOGRAPHIC

Why do retards believe Marx' bullshit?

Ha! I answered my own question.

 

[georgephillip]

"In America, libertarian means "extreme advocate of total tyranny."

No, it doesn't. It means keeping government interference in individual lives as minimal as possible.

Look, I know that's a scary concept to leftist totalitarians, but damn...there is no way you can call this man intelligent.

He's a moron.

He's trying to suggest that the rejection of government bullying equates to an endorsement of corporate bullying. But, like most liberals, he skips over the part where corporate bullying is implement by the government.

He's trying to suggest that the rejection of government bullying equates to an endorsement of corporate bullying. But, like most liberals, he skips over the part where corporate bullying is implement by the government.

Would that be the best government money can buy?

How does shrinking the IRS or FBI or SEC diminish the power of Goldman (government) Sachs?