Ars Regendi Simulation Forum

Full Version: Apologies from an American.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Our collective government is extremely divided via bureaus and governments (edit: bureaus, sub-bureaus, governments, and sub-governments). A single 'bad' president (in my opinion he is far from it considering past presidents, particularly in the 19th century as they allowed the civil war and the gilded age) is irrelevant to American success, as it is too difficult to consolidate power in 4-8 years. I'd be more worried that Americans are willing to vote for such a man, than the man himself.

Kahnite Wrote:
What you fear in not liberal social policies, it is the domination of a free people.

Show me ONE example of free citizens under developed socialism. Only ONE. [there may be some examples of emerging socialism with free citizens, like Germany, like the CSSR in the czech spring..., but non of that matters, as emerging socialism still has to fear to loose power]

Take it from someone who has first hand knowledge of what a "worker's paradise" is from two extended stays in the former Soviet Union.

So, you know what kind of evil socialism produces and gladly vote for return? I do not get it!

The point is that liberal policies such as universal health care or government support for higher education do not equal Stalinist policies and gulags.

Not quite, yes. But they are the beginning of the road to serfdom. Mises has provided ample evidence and a very logical deduction in "Liberalism" [from 1929!] that the first steps into socialism are beginning with state interventionalism. And actually, both "state funded" health care and "state funded" education are those. Side note: they are not "state funded". The state has no money on his own. It only has the money that is taken from the taxpayer in one way or the other ["printing" money, generating money out of nothingness, is in essence just another form of tax as it reduces the worth of the money that tax payers have. It is worse, though, as it also affects citizens and institutions differently].

There are several working examples of this on your continent, including your very own country.

And I am not inclined to call my country anything other than a country well on its road into socialism. Since 2011 more than ever, but actually it started well before. The ordo-liberal policies of Ludwig Erhard, influenced by Walter Eucken, are not here anymore. They have been abolished by numerous social"democratic" governments. Germany is an example of how a well prepared and well defended country can go down the road to serfdom.
France is even worse. Sweden? It's becoming Svedistan more fast than you can call it that - and socialist politics have caused that.
So, which example is left?

Democracy is the balance between what is best for the individual, and what is best for the community. When that balance is not maintained is when the excesses of Fascism or Socialism rear their angry head, and the citizens suffer.

Democracy is a government system that has the citizen as sovereign. That's all it is. There is no inherent "balance between this and that". The majority of citizens decide what is done. Granted, in a liberal (classical sense) democracy, there are protective measures that protect the interests of minorities against the majority as far as basic rights and influence are concerned.

I gladly return the offer to you, if you ever want to know from a first hand witness what the format Soviet Union was like, just ask.

I do not need that. I have lived with people from soviet union since 1990, every now and then. I know what they have said, what their parents have said. And I listened to them.

And I still live with people from the "German Democratic Republic". I have had friends that were forced into the GDR citizen observation service StaSi, because their father was a high regarded inofficial agent who decided that his daughter should follow him. I had friends that were imprisoned in Hohenschönhausen (the StaSi prison) because they once read a Western magazine and talked too open about it - and called the Central Committee what is was. My parents-in-law and my wife were born in the GDR. I also have friends born in the soviet union.

Kahnite Wrote:

adder Wrote:
Donald Trump may be the worst republican president or not, I do not care. Because he still is way better than the alternatives presented by the democratic party. He does not even compete against the two worst democratic presidents in US history. Not even close. Actually he is quite in the league of a moderate democratic president.

Do you really believe that Hillary Clinton would have been a better president, or that Barack Obama WAS a better president? Then, I believe, we do not share the same standards.

Actually, I wrote in Bernie last election (I'm in a blue state anyway). Not because I agreed with his policies, but because he was the only honest person in the race. To quote a conversation I had recently where I was asked "You couldn't possibly trust that Bernie would not screw you?", to which I replied "But at least he's up front about it! In my book, hypocrites are lower than child molesters, at least you know what they are after. A hypocrite will say one thing and do another." So yes, I value honesty above many other things in a candidate. If you can't trust them, they have no business leading anything.

And yes, Obama was a far better president than Trump. Even had a year where the deficit went down unlike this idiot who's yearly deficit spending is now more than the total accumulated deficit from 1960 through 2000.

You have this irrational fear of what you term "Socialists" (I can see you only watch Fox News, an oxymoron if ever there was one. Goebbels would be proud.), yet this fool has redistributed wealth to the upper 1% ensuring class warfare. This is social engineering on a scale that far exceeds anything any democrat ever did just to prop up the ruling elite and pad his bank account at the expense of those who can least afford it.

I respectfully disagree. Don't get me wrong, Obama was a candidate full of great promise, but he never really delivered. During his presidency, wages nor the economy recovered from 2008. In fact, if you take a look at a graph showing productivity data in the United States, you'll notice that productivity after 2008 was recovering fairly quickly. That is, until Obama released his stimulus plan, and business stop innovating, factories stopped increasing productivity, and wages stopped recovering. This entire period of "greatest economic expansion in U.S. history is really a fallacy. It's been more like 10 years of sluggish economic growth that has only delivered to the superich big tech companies. In addition, he never did anything to address the growing presence of anti-competitive practices by american corporations.

Here's the thing Obama didn't tell you: to find out where an economy will recover, you have to take the GDP graph of the country and draw the line of growth of the economy before the recession and extend it out. The total economic output of the country needs to surpass this line for the populace to experience an increase in living condition. If you were to do this simple line test with the U.S. economy after 2008, you'll realize our economy has not delivered on the people because is hasn't rebounded, and it needs to.

Here's the other thing Khanite: if you want to have a great and stable country, the number one important thing to have is a stable growing economy. The lack of such in the U.S. ever since the great recession has led to college debt becoming unbearable, millennials being poorer than their parents, and leading to a decline in the birth rate. This is reversing the historical trend of the United States in which each generation was wealthier and more prosperous than its previous one.

Perhaps one of the biggest disappointments with Obama was that although he pledged to build an economy to work for the american people, he never passed important policy to reach that goal. He never taxed buybacks or banned them. He never taxed dividends. He never worked on eliminating the numerous tax loopholes big companies abuse and small business lack access to. He decreased taxes on the rich. He didn't focus on increasing competition in telecommunications, air travel, web searches, or the film industry. Corruption remained generally legalized during his presidency. His environmental policy crippled america's already damaged infrastructure mainly through intensified environmental planning laws. His lack of focus on the rising power of China was fundamentally damaging. No efforts were made to improve cyber-security. His healthcare plan ended up being more expensive and less efficient than our previous system. In fact, Obamacare damaged an already structurally dysfunctional healthcare system. He played many of the wrong cards at a time when American leadership was crucial in rebuilding the world from a devastating financial crisis. If anything. I'd say Obama was the beginning of america's decline or it's midlife crisis (I don't know if things will eventually get better).

Just fyi, Obama doubled the national debt without growing the economy. That's worse than Trump. I'm not saying I'm a Trump supporter. He has his issues.

Your post is so full of fallacies and outright false statements, I don't know where to begin. That's what you get for living in a soundbox like adder.

Kahnite Wrote:
Your post is so full of fallacies and outright false statements, I don't know where to begin. That's what you get for living in a soundbox like adder.

Look up everything I said and tell me where I am wrong. I do my research. I look at what both sides have to say and draw conclusions based on the evidence that is presented to me. Look up the national debt in 2008 and compare it with 2016. The increase in ratio was greater than with Trump. Look up real wages since the great recession, and you'll notice they have only started to increase above inflation before coronavirus. What you don't get is that part of the reason the american people aren't happy is because the economy is not delivering. Nothing about sluggish economic growth was said during Obama practically because the media is aligned towards the left. If you even take a look at airline data, the recovery period from 2008 was sluggish compared to other American recessions. As one economist said, the 2008 recession was never the worst recession, in fact it was a relatively moderate recession. It was the lack of support for improving the business environment. Business confidence is also one of those things that gets built with time, but can easily be destroyed. I'm sorry to say, but business confidence is closely tied with politics. Thankfully, america did not go through secular stagnation in this period. Take a look at the European Union. It's lack of attention towards the economy and increased attention to private interest has left Europe with 1 percent economic growth rates a year, and the youngest generation of Italians, Spanish, french, and Germans are feeling the pressure. Despite the European welfare state being in existence, a growing economy and one that benefits the people is crucial for stability. Do you think the rise of the extreme right and left is just as a result of polarization? I think it has a lot more to do with increasingly bad living conditions. Since people are just now beginning to mobilize, they turn to extremist groups who preach their message but are just as corrupt and incompetent as other parties. Right now, because of the 10 year economic sluggish period in Europe, unemployment is high, real wages are declining faster than in america, and some European countries are considering abandoning some welfare programs since the economy is not delivering what it needs to support it. Frankly, name calling is what I find in people who don't have a realistic counterargument to give. If you do wish to give a response, respectfully use information. I encourage you to strip apart my argument on what I said.

velazquez Wrote:
I encourage you to strip apart my argument on what I said.

They (the Left) cannot do that. As they have no arguements besides personal attacks and socialism rules...

Kahnite Wrote:
Your post is so full of fallacies and outright false statements, I don't know where to begin. That's what you get for living in a soundbox like adder.

So you stopped argueing not because you couldn't answer?

Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's