[quote name='dohdough']Not wanting to engage in warfare isn't unique to libertarianism and the zealotry to actively engage in warfare isn't unique to this administration either. Hiring mercenaries, economic or otherwise, to continue imperialistic campaigns isn't any less violent or non-interventionist. There's more than one way to coerce someone than having a gun to their head.
What unfriendly business environment? Business literally boomed and then busted because there was no forethought into long term consequences of making risky financial transactions. Countries don't go broke the way individuals do and their economies don't crash because social programs were "too generous."
Currency manipulation, you say? You mean something that every country that has their own currency does?
WTF are you even talking about? Lending at low to no interest led to inflation and bubbles? So lending at high interest rates would've been ok? Interest rates have almost nothing to do with it compared to that actual
lending. Doing it in a wanton manner is exactly what caused it. Do the banks have no responsibility in this?
People with enough capital to benefit from capital gains won't stop investing because taxes are higher. You already stated that there was an economic bubble in your very post and now you're walking it back? WTF
What the mother
? Are you having a hard time staying on your own subject?
If Obama is not responsible for the mess he walked into, then why the
is Hollande responsible for most of the bullshit he walked into as if Sarkozy screwed the freakin pooch? Is it really that hard to follow your own arguments?
For someone that professes to know so much about libertarianism, I'd think that you'd be familiar with one of Friedman's greatest failures. But no, I was the one that had to enlighten you on this little snippet of history. Once again, you've proved how you don't know shit about libertarianism.
What is it with your kitchen bullshit? This isn't the first or second time you've used that cliche. Do you get off on being passive aggressive or something?
"Servants, labourers and workmen of different kinds, make up the far greater part of every great political society. But what improves the circumstances of the greater part can never be regarded as an inconvenience to the whole. No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable. It is but equity, besides, that they who feed, clothe and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labour as to be themselves tolerably well fed, cloathed and lodged" - Karl Marx
But thanks for proving my point that you think the "Founding Fathers" were a monolithic group. You must really love narratives.
Yeah, it's a total conspiracy that google uses algorithms to tailor search results according to your searches and history. It must be
ing magic.
A reasonable and introspective person would conclude that they were careless and be more mindful of their sources, but you? You just go with it because your ego won't let you admit fault. I wonder what your religion says about that since you like referencing it so much when talking about economic policy.
Don't worry, I won't put you on blast for misrepresenting your occupation.
When was the last time you made a post outside vs.? Looks like trolling is your only purpose here. I couldn't give a shit how often you post on vs. and you're just another troll leftover from the last election.[/QUOTE]
Funny, Franklin also refused to patent most of his inventions, believing that everyone should benefit from them. Damn dirty socialist commie Kenyan....
We don't like it, but we'll condone it...
