Trump woos balcks, "what the hell do you have to lose?”

[underguy1]

Ad hominem

adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument.


Does government create wealth or not??

You don't have an argument. You just keep misrepresenting mine.

That appears to your entire MO.

It's typical libertarian dishonesty.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You don't have an argument. You just keep misrepresenting mine.

That appears to your entire MO.

It's typical libertarian dishonesty.

You do know libertarian is a political ideology and not a word that means things you don't like right?

And I'm not misrepresenting yours, I'm asking you to explain it.....which you can't seem to do.

SOooooooooooo looks like you're totally full of shit just like I always knew you were.

 

[underguy1]

And I'm not misrepresenting yours, I'm asking you to explain it.

You appear to be a compulsive liar. Not to mention a hypocrite.

Both traits common on the extreme right.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You appear to be a compulsive liar. Not to mention a hypocrite.

Both traits common on the extreme right.

Not buying what you're selling without asking you to explain it doesn't make me extreme right.

Are you going to answer the question or not?

 

[underguy1]

I haven't seen a single question from you that relates to anything I've said.

In the meantime I've asked several direct questions of you that have been ignored and avoided.

That's what makes you a lying hypocrite with zero ethics.

Not to mention an islamophobic racist scumbag libertarian.

 

[hashtag45]

Hei underguy.
Are there any other english-speaking -mainly on world politics- forums that you'd recommend? As in good for browsing? (Just a name or two, no details needed).
Sorry about intruding here, but I find that pm's can be a bit weird and personal.

Thanks

 

[underguy1]

Hei underguy.
Are there any other english-speaking -mainly on world politics- forums that you'd recommend? As in good for browsing? (Just a name or two, no details needed).
Sorry about intruding here, but I find that pm's can be a bit weird and personal.

Thanks

Not really. The good ones don't usually last long. They get invaded by libertarians and other authoritarian arse wipes who are there only to disrupt.

And these days western governments are disrupting and manipulating social media to suit their own narrative.

We really have entered an Orwellian dystopia.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I haven't seen a single question from you that relates to anything I've said.

You said Government can will wealth into existence and doesn't need to take any from the people. It does it just because.

Then you said N. Korea can't and that the US government is waging economic war against them.

You provide evidence of neither and refuse to explain this conflict.

In the meantime I've asked several direct questions of you that have been ignored and avoided.

All you've done is call me names.


As you do here.......

That's what makes you a lying hypocrite with zero ethics.

Not to mention an islamophobic racist scumbag libertarian.

I've not said anything Islamophobic, racist or libertarian.

 

[underguy1]

You said Government can will wealth into existence and doesn't need to take any from the people. It does it just because.

Then you said N. Korea can't and that the US government is waging economic war against them.

You provide evidence of neither and refuse to explain this conflict.



All you've done is call me names.


As you do here.......



I've not said anything Islamophobic, racist or libertarian.

You're a pathetic liar.

Grow the fuck up, will you?

 

[BotanyBoy]

You're a pathetic liar.

Grow the fuck up, will you?

OH look more name calling!!

https://flagunblog.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/suprise-jim-nabors.jpg

Guess you can't answer that question of conflict then, prob because it would break your little commie soul to admit either the US isn't the evil you think it is or communist dictatorships and Islamic theocracies aren't anywhere near as good as you purport them to be.

 

[underguy1]

If you just keep repeating pathetic lies expect to be called a pathetic liar.

Why would you expect anything else, slack jaw?

And now we have yet another strawman in the making.

I don't get what you types think you 'win' when it's all dishonesty and pretence that you're peddling.

 

[underguy1]

You said Government can will wealth into existence and doesn't need to take any from the people. It does it just because.

Then you said N. Korea can't and that the US government is waging economic war against them.

These are inventions from the whole cloth. Invented by you.

So, you are either dishonest or stupid, or both.

I'm betting on c).

 

[BotanyBoy]

And now we have yet another strawman in the making.

.

Asking you to explain your position isn't a straw man argument.

These are inventions from the whole cloth. Invented by you.

So, you are either dishonest or stupid, or both.

I'm betting on c).

So then government can't create wealth and has to take it from people.....and the USA isn't waging economic war on N. Korea?

That seems like a radically different from your normal sentiments.

Are you going to clarify your position or just keep talking shit?

 

[underguy1]

Asking you to explain your position isn't a straw man argument.

But you're not doing that. You're inventing my position and then setting up false dichotomies.

So then government can't create wealth and has to take it from people.....and the USA isn't waging economic war on N. Korea?

And that's your usual standard bullshit mode back again.

 

[BotanyBoy]

But you're not doing that. You're inventing my position and then setting up false dichotomies.

Then what is false?

And that's your usual standard bullshit mode back again.

No I'm trying to see if your able to take any sort of position on anything.


Can government create wealth or does it have to take it from it's people first?

 

[AlwaysHungry]

Can government create wealth or does it have to take it from it's people first?

I'm not sure I want to jump into the middle of a private argument that seems to be going on and on and on. But there is an answer to that question.

The founding fathers of the U.S. conceived of the government as a mechanism where the citizenry could get together and deliberate on what sort of future they wanted for the nation. That system (commonly called a "republic") works well, provided that the citizenry stays engaged in the process. There is always the danger that an oligarchy will capture the government and exploit it for its own purposes, as is the case in the US today.

Libertarians are like teenagers, who think of the government as an oppressive parent telling them they ought to wear seat belts. They miss the point of the US constitution.

When the government is working properly, yes, it can create wealth, in particular through the creation of credit (for which the government should have a monopoly) and the directing of credit solely into areas of the economy which can provide the technologically progressive increases in the physical production of the nation, typically through science and infrastructure development. Much of the prosperity which the US has enjoyed over the past 50 years (which is diminishing rather rapidly now) was due to the Apollo program and the torrent of new technologies which it created, which were assimilated into the economy in the form of things like personal computers. No private company can do something like the Apollo program, or the Tennessee Valley Authority -- private companies need a return on their investment soon. They can't wait 50 years to see results. The government can.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'm not sure I want to jump into the middle of a private argument that seems to be going on and on and on. But there is an answer to that question.

The founding fathers of the U.S. conceived of the government as a mechanism where the citizenry could get together and deliberate on what sort of future they wanted for the nation. That system (commonly called a "republic") works well, provided that the citizenry stays engaged in the process. There is always the danger that an oligarchy will capture the government and exploit it for its own purposes, as is the case in the US today.

True.

Libertarians are like teenagers, who think of the government as an oppressive parent telling them they ought to wear seat belts. They miss the point of the US constitution.

As someone who has to hire a contractor under penalty of law to change the batteries in my smoke/CO detector because us civilians are too stupid to change the batteries and need the nanny state to do it for us......sometimes I think they have a point.

When the government is working properly, yes, it can create wealth, in particular through the creation of credit (for which the government should have a monopoly) and the directing of credit solely into areas of the economy which can provide the technologically progressive increases in the physical production of the nation, typically through science and infrastructure development. Much of the prosperity which the US has enjoyed over the past 50 years (which is diminishing rather rapidly now) was due to the Apollo program and the torrent of new technologies which it created, which were assimilated into the economy in the form of things like personal computers. No private company can do something like the Apollo program, or the Tennessee Valley Authority -- private companies need a return on their investment soon. They can't wait 50 years to see results. The government can.

It creates wealth by investing the collective money. Totally makes sense.

Does it get that money by willing it into existence as UG1 suggest? Or do they take it from the citizenry/borrow from other countries on credit??

Because if what UG1 says is true, then max power super government N. Korea should be one of the richest, most powerful countries on the planet. Which is the wall I have him against.

Either he's wrong about the US and the governments ability to just create wealth because government magic, or he's wrong about the awesomeness of totalitarian dictatorships like N. Korea.

That's why he had a melt down last night and ran off.....

 

[AlwaysHungry]

Again, I'm not interested in inserting myself into any interpersonal tiffs. It is tremendously boring for third parties.

Yes, under a proper Hamilton/Lincoln financial system, the government wills money into existence by creating credit which it loans to private banks, with major strings attached.

Regulations can be moronic, or they can be intelligent. I would prefer not to be served e. Coli in restaurants.

 

[underguy1]

True.



As someone who has to hire a contractor under penalty of law to change the batteries in my smoke/CO detector because us civilians are too stupid to change the batteries and need the nanny state to do it for us......sometimes I think they have a point.



It creates wealth by investing the collective money. Totally makes sense.

Does it get that money by willing it into existence as UG1 suggest? Or do they take it from the citizenry/borrow from other countries on credit??

Because if what UG1 says is true, then max power super government N. Korea should be one of the richest, most powerful countries on the planet. Which is the wall I have him against.

Either he's wrong about the US and the governments ability to just create wealth because government magic, or he's wrong about the awesomeness of totalitarian dictatorships like N. Korea.

That's why he had a melt down last night and ran off.....

You don't have me against a wall.

Your argument is a strawman embellished with a series of logical fallacies.

Try arguing against something I actually said rather than this dishonest garbage you engage in.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You don't have me against a wall.

Your argument is a strawman embellished with a series of logical fallacies.

Try arguing against something I actually said rather than this dishonest garbage you engage in.

Why don't you try explaining your position then instead of just name calling?


If you don't I'm just going to keep you against that wall.

If government creates wealth then why is N.Korea doing so poorly?

 

[underguy1]

Again, I'm not interested in inserting myself into any interpersonal tiffs. It is tremendously boring for third parties.

Yes, under a proper Hamilton/Lincoln financial system, the government wills money into existence by creating credit which it loans to private banks, with major strings attached.

Regulations can be moronic, or they can be intelligent. I would prefer not to be served e. Coli in restaurants.

Currency issuing governments create money when they spend by marking up accounts in the private sector.

 

[underguy1]

If government creates wealth then why is N.Korea doing so poorly?

Why do you keep repeating the same strawman over and over again?

 

[AlwaysHungry]

Governments do not create weath, but they can create credit, which if invested intelligently may result in wealth. There are other factors, such as the relative abundance of natural resources and a literate workforce. North Korea is essentially a nation under siege, due to the idiotic neocon foreign policy of the US. Sane forces in both Koreas want to reunify and build the rail links that will connect them to the rest of Asia, which is the road to recovery for N.Korea. The US is obstructing that.

 

[underguy1]

Governments do not create weath, but they can create credit, which if invested intelligently may result in wealth. There are other factors, such as the relative abundance of natural resources and a literate workforce. North Korea is essentially a nation under siege, due to the idiotic neocon foreign policy of the US. Sane forces in both Koreas want to reunify and build the rail links that will connect them to the rest of Asia, which is the road to recovery for N.Korea. The US is obstructing that.

Are you saying that my dollars (government liabilities) are not wealth?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Why do you keep repeating the same strawman over and over again?

Asking you to explain your position isn't a straw man ya big dummy.

Governments do not create weath, but they can create credit, which if invested intelligently may result in wealth. There are other factors, such as the relative abundance of natural resources and a literate workforce.

So if that is the case then either N. Korea is being run by totally incompetent leadership or their particular flavor of communism is shit.....

North Korea is essentially a nation under siege, due to the idiotic neocon foreign policy of the US. Sane forces in both Koreas want to reunify and build the rail links that will connect them to the rest of Asia, which is the road to recovery for N.Korea. The US is obstructing that.

I don't think N.Korea wants to reunify. I'm pretty sure it wants to take over and destroy to make S.Korea just like N.Korea.

Also how is the US preventing a unified Korea without the support of S. Korea saying "We don't want any of psycho boys bullshit"?