Why Conservatives just don't get the pope

[bendog]

How do you know there would have been a quick recovery? The boom and bust cycle of unregulated capitalism creates terrific devastation. The deeper the recession, the more robust the recovery. It depends on what you mean by gov. regulation, I suppose. Look at all the gov. spending for WWII. That helped FDR's recovery immensely. The New Deal was working. The only time it stalled was when FDR took some foolish advice and cut back on spending in the late 1930s causing the recovery to stall out temporarily (until gov. spending was hiked up again).

Historical example.

Every time the government has gotten out of the way, the recovery is quick. Every time they've infered, the recovery was prolonged.

The only reason WW2 succeeded at pulling us out of the Depression it because it forced FDR to relax and eliminate all the regulations he had imposed on industry in order to have a fighting chance against our enemies.

I disagree. Markets are no self-regulating. They never have been. Not in the sense comparable to governmental resolution of market failures.


Year %Change in GNP President
---------------------------------
1930 - 9.4% Hoover
1931 - 8.5 Hoover
1932 -13.4 Hoover
1933 - 2.1 Hoover/Roosevelt
1934 + 7.7 Roosevelt
1935 + 8.1 Roosevelt
1936 +14.1 Roosevelt
1937 + 5.0 Roosevelt
1938 - 4.5 Roosevelt
1939 + 7.9 Roosevelt

Look at how the New Deal, enacted in 1933, turned around our economy. What happened in 1938? FDR listened to one of his advisors and started to cut back on gov. spending. That had disasterous results. WWII did not happen for 2 more years as a stimulative phenomenon.

The answer to your question would be found if you looked into the causes of the downturns, and global economic situation, at both 1920 and 1930. And it can be found online in Milton Friedman's A Monetary History of the US

 

[TakeAStepBack]

That's a lot of blather and insults and zero rebuttal except to appeal to authority on the ethical and moral implications of theft. In your world, if the government ratified the constitution to include the murder of anyone named John, you'd probably also argue that it isn't murder since the government wrote down that it has the authority to exterminate all Johns in the USA.

Thats exactly the type of "thinking" you display here. The government thanks you for allowing them to think for you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Progressivism never was and will never be the Gospel of Christ.

You don't speak for the Christ, now do you?

From time to time I do. I am not going to lie.

You should very much know that.

OK, I believe that you believe you at times speak for Christ, which makes you a bit , but carry on.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Well, Fake, you speak on behalf of other people regularly. So perhaps you're just projecting.

 

[RightDown]

One more thing. Is your ego so fragile that you cannot withstand being part of group without losing yourself?

I just don't get the protests involving Collectivism....

Here's a hint, you are part of a collective whether you want to admit it or not. You might as well man up and make the best of it.

Or will you wither on the vine ssssssssssssssssssssssssss, completely deflated of your specialness b/c you paid your taxes one year?

 

[RightDown]

Historical example.

Every time the government has gotten out of the way, the recovery is quick. Every time they've infered, the recovery was prolonged.

The only reason WW2 succeeded at pulling us out of the Depression it because it forced FDR to relax and eliminate all the regulations he had imposed on industry in order to have a fighting chance against our enemies.

I disagree. Markets are no self-regulating. They never have been. Not in the sense comparable to governmental resolution of market failures.


Year %Change in GNP President
---------------------------------
1930 - 9.4% Hoover
1931 - 8.5 Hoover
1932 -13.4 Hoover
1933 - 2.1 Hoover/Roosevelt
1934 + 7.7 Roosevelt
1935 + 8.1 Roosevelt
1936 +14.1 Roosevelt
1937 + 5.0 Roosevelt
1938 - 4.5 Roosevelt
1939 + 7.9 Roosevelt

Look at how the New Deal, enacted in 1933, turned around our economy. What happened in 1938? FDR listened to one of his advisors and started to cut back on gov. spending. That had disasterous results. WWII did not happen for 2 more years as a stimulative phenomenon.

The answer to your question would be found if you looked into the causes of the downturns, and global economic situation, at both 1920 and 1930. And it can be found online in Milton Friedman's A Monetary History of the US

Would you mind paraphrasing the Miltonic POV?

 

[rightwinger]

Historical example.

Every time the government has gotten out of the way, the recovery is quick. Every time they've infered, the recovery was prolonged.

The only reason WW2 succeeded at pulling us out of the Depression it because it forced FDR to relax and eliminate all the regulations he had imposed on industry in order to have a fighting chance against our enemies.

Actually, you have it backwards

In the case of Hoover and Bush it was Government inaction that allowed controllable economic downturns to turn into major economic collapses

It is the standard Republican, let the economy self correct that led to economic disasters

So despite the fact that both Hoover and Bush tried to micromanage the economy, they didn't act? You think FDR ran to the right of Hoover promising to have less government because Hoover didn't act?

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

So tell me, if it's the exact opposite of what I was saying, why is that when Harding/Coolidge slashed taxes and spending in response to the 1920 Depression they had one of the greatest economic expansions in human history? If your assessment is correct, their inaction should have caused a deeper depression

Actually, both Bush and Hoover stood like deer in the headlights as their economy crashed around them

"Prosperity is just around the corner"

Sorry, but I am not going to engage in Harding/Coolidge revisionist history

 

[chikenwing]

Sigh, sometimes you guys confound me. You spend a lot of time trashing religion, or Christians in particlar but then extol a religious figure because he purportedly conforms with your political viewpoints. Forgive me for saying so, but that's just sad.

Pope Francis gets it

Why don't conservatives?

We do its people like yourself that refuse to listen.So hung up in your sef serving party over common sense bull shit.

 

[RightDown]

That's a lot of blather and insults and zero rebuttal except to appeal to authority on the ethical and moral implications of theft. In your world, if the government ratified the constitution to include the murder of anyone named John, you'd probably also argue that it isn't murder since the government wrote down that it has the authority to exterminate all Johns in the USA.

Thats exactly the type of "thinking" you display here. The government thanks you for allowing them to think for you.

I'm having fun b/c you will not admit that you are wrong. So when one does not admit the obvious, that person is open to scorn and derision as a recalcitrant contrarian.

Yes, the government does retain the state's right to execute people. Again, I disagree with that.

But like you, I am part of the state collective and I have to live with some unpleasant realities. Personally I abhor the death penalty.

Apparently you think you're freer than anyone else b/c you're a freeloader at the taxpayer's expense. I mean you do back up your words right? You refuse to pay any taxes b/c that's stealing and wrong. Not to be too insulting but that's an argument a four year old would make.

 

[bendog]

Actually, you have it backwards

In the case of Hoover and Bush it was Government inaction that allowed controllable economic downturns to turn into major economic collapses

It is the standard Republican, let the economy self correct that led to economic disasters

So despite the fact that both Hoover and Bush tried to micromanage the economy, they didn't act? You think FDR ran to the right of Hoover promising to have less government because Hoover didn't act?

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

So tell me, if it's the exact opposite of what I was saying, why is that when Harding/Coolidge slashed taxes and spending in response to the 1920 Depression they had one of the greatest economic expansions in human history? If your assessment is correct, their inaction should have caused a deeper depression

Actually, both Bush and Hoover stood like deer in the headlights as their economy crashed around them

"Prosperity is just around the corner"

Sorry, but I am not going to engage in Harding/Coolidge revisionist history

Actually Bushii acted directly contrary to what Harding and Hoover both did.

 

[The Rabbi]

Actually, you have it backwards

In the case of Hoover and Bush it was Government inaction that allowed controllable economic downturns to turn into major economic collapses

It is the standard Republican, let the economy self correct that led to economic disasters

So despite the fact that both Hoover and Bush tried to micromanage the economy, they didn't act? You think FDR ran to the right of Hoover promising to have less government because Hoover didn't act?

That's got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

So tell me, if it's the exact opposite of what I was saying, why is that when Harding/Coolidge slashed taxes and spending in response to the 1920 Depression they had one of the greatest economic expansions in human history? If your assessment is correct, their inaction should have caused a deeper depression

Actually, both Bush and Hoover stood like deer in the headlights as their economy crashed around them

"Prosperity is just around the corner"

Sorry, but I am not going to engage in Harding/Coolidge revisionist history

Actually you are talking out of your ass. Again. But I'll let the man himself explain it to you. Note that his solution consists of raising wages and infrastructure spending. This was 1930. We see how well that worked out.
Herbert Hoover: Annual Message to the Congress on the State of the Union.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

One more thing. Is your ego so fragile that you cannot withstand being part of group without losing yourself?

I just don't get the protests involving Collectivism....

Here's a hint, you are part of a collective whether you want to admit it or not. You might as well man up and make the best of it.

Or will you wither on the vine ssssssssssssssssssssssssss, completely deflated of your specialness b/c you paid your taxes one year?

Clearly my point has gone over your head. Clearly.

 

[The Rabbi]

One more thing. Is your ego so fragile that you cannot withstand being part of group without losing yourself?

I just don't get the protests involving Collectivism....

Here's a hint, you are part of a collective whether you want to admit it or not. You might as well man up and make the best of it.

Or will you wither on the vine ssssssssssssssssssssssssss, completely deflated of your specialness b/c you paid your taxes one year?

Clearly my point has gone over your head. Clearly.

You're dealing with someone totally incapable of rational debate.

 

[RightDown]

One more thing. Is your ego so fragile that you cannot withstand being part of group without losing yourself?

I just don't get the protests involving Collectivism....

Here's a hint, you are part of a collective whether you want to admit it or not. You might as well man up and make the best of it.

Or will you wither on the vine ssssssssssssssssssssssssss, completely deflated of your specialness b/c you paid your taxes one year?

Clearly my point has gone over your head. Clearly.

You have no point to make other than you're too cheap to pay taxes and too dense to realize that you live in a constitutional democratic republic.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

That's a lot of blather and insults and zero rebuttal except to appeal to authority on the ethical and moral implications of theft. In your world, if the government ratified the constitution to include the murder of anyone named John, you'd probably also argue that it isn't murder since the government wrote down that it has the authority to exterminate all Johns in the USA.

Thats exactly the type of "thinking" you display here. The government thanks you for allowing them to think for you.

I'm having fun b/c you will not admit that you are wrong. So when one does not admit the obvious, that person is open to scorn and derision as a recalcitrant contrarian.

Yes, the government does retain the state's right to execute people. Again, I disagree with that.

But like you, I am part of the state collective and I have to live with some unpleasant realities. Personally I abhor the death penalty.

Apparently you think you're freer than anyone else b/c you're a freeloader at the taxpayer's expense. I mean you do back up your words right? You refuse to pay any taxes b/c that's stealing and wrong. Not to be too insulting but that's an argument a four year old would make.

I'm not going to admit I'm wrong because I am not wrong. Taxation is theft. Whether the state writes down on paper it has the authority to do so, or whether most people sit by idle and comply is irrelevant to what it is. IT IS THEFT. No amount of spin, appeal to imaginary contracts or otherwise will change that fact. The same as the State deciding to amand the constitution to exterminate all individuals named John doesn't make it anything less than murder. The State doesn't have monopoly on ethical/moral underwritings, only the monopoly on the use of force and violence.

I'm a freeloader now? You really are a terrrible debate participant. You're in the right company with RWer, Wry and the others who simply do not, and can not think for themselves at all.

And yes, i do pay my taxes because if one does not, they can expect to have violence exacted on them from the State and you support that as well.

There is no collective. it's a myth perpetrated by Statists in the same fashion that a social contract actually exists when one clearly doesn't.

Speaking of which, would you mind pulling out the copy of that contract I signed? Yeah, I didn't think so. Tacit consent is compliance, not consent.

 

[RightDown]

One more thing. Is your ego so fragile that you cannot withstand being part of group without losing yourself?

I just don't get the protests involving Collectivism....

Here's a hint, you are part of a collective whether you want to admit it or not. You might as well man up and make the best of it.

Or will you wither on the vine ssssssssssssssssssssssssss, completely deflated of your specialness b/c you paid your taxes one year?

Clearly my point has gone over your head. Clearly.

You're dealing with someone totally incapable of rational debate.

Haven't I slapped you around enough already? Don't answer that.

You don't debate. You pull shit like this post of yours. I'm sure you're patting yourself on the back right now. You need some self esteem work boy.

 

[Harry Dresden]

" Why Conservatives just don't get the pope"

Because conservatives are in bed with Big Business. And though the Pope's a CEO of sorts of one of the biggest (if not the biggest) business on Earth, the Pope's kicking them out of bed and making them get ready for school.

and Democrats are not?....boy they got you were they want you dont they?...

 

[RightDown]

That's a lot of blather and insults and zero rebuttal except to appeal to authority on the ethical and moral implications of theft. In your world, if the government ratified the constitution to include the murder of anyone named John, you'd probably also argue that it isn't murder since the government wrote down that it has the authority to exterminate all Johns in the USA.

Thats exactly the type of "thinking" you display here. The government thanks you for allowing them to think for you.

I'm having fun b/c you will not admit that you are wrong. So when one does not admit the obvious, that person is open to scorn and derision as a recalcitrant contrarian.

Yes, the government does retain the state's right to execute people. Again, I disagree with that.

But like you, I am part of the state collective and I have to live with some unpleasant realities. Personally I abhor the death penalty.

Apparently you think you're freer than anyone else b/c you're a freeloader at the taxpayer's expense. I mean you do back up your words right? You refuse to pay any taxes b/c that's stealing and wrong. Not to be too insulting but that's an argument a four year old would make.

I'm not going to admit I'm wrong because I am not wrong. Taxation is theft. Whether the state writes down on paper it has the authority to do so, or whether most people sit by idle and comply is irrelevant to what it is. IT IS THEFT. No amoun tof spin, appeal to imaginary contracts or otherwise will change that fact. The same as the State deciding to amand the constitution to exterminate all individuals named John doesn't make it anything less than murder. The State doesn't have monopoly on ethical/moral underwritings, only the monopoly on the use of force and violence.

I'm a freeloader now? You really are a terrrible debate participant. You're in the right company with RWer, Wry and the others who simply do not, adn can not think for themselves at all.

And yes, i do pay my taxces because if one does not, they can expect to have violence exacted on them from the State adn you support that as well.

There is no collective. it's a myth perpetrated by Statists in the same fashion that a so0cial contract actually exists when one clearly doesn't.

Speaking of which, would you mind pulling out the copy of that contract I signed? Yeah, I didn't think so. Tacit consent is compliance, not consent.

implied consent

n. consent when surrounding circumstances exist which would lead a reasonable person to believe that this consent had been given, although no direct, express or explicit words of agreement had been uttered.
Legal Dictionary | Law.com

You are selfish to the point of irrationality. You don't have the capacity for reasonable debate and that's why the concept of 'implied consent' completely evades your understanding and capitulation.

 

[The Rabbi]

Clearly my point has gone over your head. Clearly.

You're dealing with someone totally incapable of rational debate.

Haven't I slapped you around enough already? Don't answer that.

You don't debate. You pull shit like this post of yours. I'm sure you're patting yourself on the back right now. You need some self esteem work boy.

"Slap you around."
That's rich. You couldn't slap a dead dog. Your posts are so content free they dont even warrant comment. Every now and then I peak just to make sure you havent accidentally posted a fact.

 

[RightDown]

That's a lot of blather and insults and zero rebuttal except to appeal to authority on the ethical and moral implications of theft. In your world, if the government ratified the constitution to include the murder of anyone named John, you'd probably also argue that it isn't murder since the government wrote down that it has the authority to exterminate all Johns in the USA.

Thats exactly the type of "thinking" you display here. The government thanks you for allowing them to think for you.

I'm having fun b/c you will not admit that you are wrong. So when one does not admit the obvious, that person is open to scorn and derision as a recalcitrant contrarian.

Yes, the government does retain the state's right to execute people. Again, I disagree with that.

But like you, I am part of the state collective and I have to live with some unpleasant realities. Personally I abhor the death penalty.

Apparently you think you're freer than anyone else b/c you're a freeloader at the taxpayer's expense. I mean you do back up your words right? You refuse to pay any taxes b/c that's stealing and wrong. Not to be too insulting but that's an argument a four year old would make.

I'm not going to admit I'm wrong because I am not wrong. Taxation is theft. Whether the state writes down on paper it has the authority to do so, or whether most people sit by idle and comply is irrelevant to what it is. IT IS THEFT. No amount of spin, appeal to imaginary contracts or otherwise will change that fact. The same as the State deciding to amand the constitution to exterminate all individuals named John doesn't make it anything less than murder. The State doesn't have monopoly on ethical/moral underwritings, only the monopoly on the use of force and violence.

I'm a freeloader now? You really are a terrrible debate participant. You're in the right company with RWer, Wry and the others who simply do not, and can not think for themselves at all.

And yes, i do pay my taxes because if one does not, they can expect to have violence exacted on them from the State and you support that as well.

There is no collective. it's a myth perpetrated by Statists in the same fashion that a social contract actually exists when one clearly doesn't.

Speaking of which, would you mind pulling out the copy of that contract I signed? Yeah, I didn't think so. Tacit consent is compliance, not consent.

And finally, you're a citizen of the US enjoying all the benefits of citizenship yet you don't want to pay for it.

But you do pay your taxes instead of standing behind your deeply held belief that taxes are theft. You show no indication of trying to change the law, you are just compllicit in the crime.

Enough already. You bore me. You stick to your 'gov. is evil', 'taxes are theft' lines of nonsense and be secure in the understanding that intelligent people all over the country are laughing at you.

That's that darn ol' Statist Collective for you.