Post Reply  Post Thread 
Pages (7): « First < Previous 3 4 5 6 [7] Last »

Government spending = unemployment

Author Message
Lord Alexander
Comrade
*


Posts: 1,586
Words count: 238,210
Group: Basic
Joined: Feb2009
Status: Offline
Reputation: 61
Experience: 616
Glory Points: 146
Medals: 4

Post: #61
RE: Government spending = unemployment

Helsworth Wrote:

debauchery Wrote:
It will be impossible to commit corruption once sufficient surveillance, not necessarily of individuals, but of institutional resources is achieved.

For that you'll need an open society, one in which dissenters are allowed to speak their mind - else you'll never know for sure. If people aren't allowed to speak against corruption, then all of their reports to the authorities will simply catch dust and won't amount to anything. More than that, they won't report it, if they feel that the roots of their observed corruption run all the way to the top hierarchy.

In Singapore the democracy and freedom of press exist only on paper, but nevertheless according to the Transparency International it is one of the least corrupt countries in the world.



Lord Alexander Wrote:

Helsworth Wrote:
Secondly, I'm having an exchange with Roger (that seems to bother you).

The forum is not your personal space. If you have posted something on the forum anyone can respond to it. If you want to discuss something only with one person you should use Telegrams, not the forum. You are Moderator and should know such things.

Helsworth Wrote:
1) I was having an exchange with Roger on this matter, and you claimed that somehow that was me on an ideological rampage against Technocracy & now you have the audacity to claim that I don't want people to reply to my posts (lol). Where do you get such impressions from? The bully excuse doesn't fly anymore. I was not coercive or foul mouthed.
Like I said before, if you wish to vent, vent on the forum, on pm, or on my rep page. You've every right to do so.
If I criticize libertarianism, technocracy, communism, or capitalism, and you rage quit that's not my fault.

Unfortunately I again misinterpreted you because you have formulated yourself unclearly. Your phrase left in me the impression that you are implying that I should not intervene into your discussion with Roger.

And I never said that you are bully. I said that you are waging ideological crusade against Technocracy movement, and continuing to do that even after the only proponent of Technocracy has left the forum. You could as well address your anti-Technocracy tirades to Debauchery or me instead of Roger because his posts to which you are “responding” are not addressing the ideas or activities of Technocracy movement. After the departure of RP you are the one who again and again is returning this discussion to Howard Scott and Technocracy movement.

Of course it is your right to act like this, you are not breaking the rules of the forum or anything like this, but personally I find such behavior to be extremely distasteful. Technocracy, unlike Communism, Capitalism or even Libertarianism, is not an ideology that has proponents on every corner of the Web, and composing multiple walls of text against it is pointless, and after the RP’s departure it also became quite nasty activity. But feel free to continue your fun.

Quote:
2) It is hypocritical to state one thing vehemently, and then do an almost 180 on it. Scott's first stance could have been a lot more nuanced and he would not have looked like an opportunist.

I think that initially Scott hoped that he will be able to generate enough public support to convince governments either to simply drop the idea of war or at least to force them to disclose more solid arguments in support of the war, and when this approach has failed he was forced to demand from them that they at least discussed the war just with his organization. Of course both demands were very naïve, but I do not see any drastic turns here.

This post was last modified: 12.11.2015 17:41 by Lord Alexander.

12.11.2015 17:23
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,963
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #62
RE: Government spending = unemployment

By that reasoning, I shouldn't criticize flat earth theory, because there are not many supporters of it on the web. I disliked you and RP's parallelism to the subject matter (and the sheer display of ignorance on it); but you and he (and anyone else) have every right to post whatever floats your individual boats. Hope one day you'll understand that flows and stocks are not fiction & that double entry bookkeeping is not an ideology.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 12.11.2015 18:19 by Helsworth.

12.11.2015 17:49
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
debauchery
Senior Member
*


Posts: 318
Words count: 21,901
Group: Basic
Joined: Dec2014
Status: Offline
Reputation: 2
Experience: 0
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #63
RE: Government spending = unemployment

I don't personally see the sense in trading in electricity a la technocracy. Technocracy theorizes that it might abolish inequality, but Denmark has low inequality simply by having trade unions. However, it does have a certain totalitarian quality to it. It might be enacted as an administrative measure.

12.11.2015 20:48
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
debauchery
Senior Member
*


Posts: 318
Words count: 21,901
Group: Basic
Joined: Dec2014
Status: Offline
Reputation: 2
Experience: 0
Glory Points: 0
Medals: 0

Post: #64
RE: Government spending = unemployment

Without an end to bourgeoisie democracy the fighting will continue.

12.11.2015 23:20
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Lord Alexander
Comrade
*


Posts: 1,586
Words count: 238,210
Group: Basic
Joined: Feb2009
Status: Offline
Reputation: 61
Experience: 616
Glory Points: 146
Medals: 4

Post: #65
RE: Government spending = unemployment

Helsworth Wrote:
By that reasoning, I shouldn't criticize flat earth theory, because there are not many supporters of it on the web.

But as far as I know, you are not posting long walls of text against the flat Earth theory?

In any case I am sorry, but I fear that for now I have to stop altercating. Today has died very good friend of my family, so for now I am out of quarrelsome mood. Maybe we may return to this talk later.

13.11.2015 20:56
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Helsworth
Heathen
****


Posts: 8,854
Words count: 1,597,963
Group: Super Moderators
Joined: Nov2008
Status: Offline
Reputation: 146
Experience: 859
Glory Points: 260
Medals: 11

Post: #66
RE: Government spending = unemployment

Lord Alexander Wrote:

Helsworth Wrote:
By that reasoning, I shouldn't criticize flat earth theory, because there are not many supporters of it on the web.

But as far as I know, you are not posting long walls of text against the flat Earth theory?

When a user will post about how he believes in Flat earth theory, I'll do that.
Rising Pheonix rage quit, pure and simple. I don't know why he chose to do that. He knew of that article I posted beforehand. I expressed beforehand my views to him on why I disagree with energy accounting method (the same thing with Marxist labor certificates).
In the comment sections, I hook up RP with the link to the critical article on Technocracy.
http://serbanvcenache.blogspot.ro/2015/0...arted.html
He didn't have a problem then as he did now, because his reply was "That was an interesting read, thank you."
But here on the forum, months later, he came out of the blue, talking strage. I suppose people shouldn't be allowed to make contracts, because they don't know the enthalpic input, throughput, and output of such an effort. "Under Technocracy, there would be no debt." LoL, yeah right. Anyway, it was a debate. When I'm showed that I'm wrong, I change my opinions. Crossover demolished my orthodox beliefs about economics. I was resistant at first. I didn't curse at him. He didn't curse at me. And neither of us rage quit. Then, I started exploring his arguments more and found that what he was saying was true, and what I previously believed was wrong. I admitted that & thanked him for it.


https://www.patreon.com/SerbanVCEnache

This post was last modified: 03.12.2015 00:53 by Helsworth.

02.12.2015 10:56
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pages (7): « First < Previous 3 4 5 6 [7] Last »
Post Reply  Post Thread 

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Government must run deficits even in good times Helsworth 4 1,718 29.10.2019 23:22
Last Post: Greater_Zenith
  [The Economist] American taxes are unusually progressive. Government spending is not. Ajay Alcos 0 911 27.11.2017 15:56
Last Post: Ajay Alcos
  A Very Brief Summary of my opinionated view on government and econ. CommieScum 0 992 28.04.2017 22:01
Last Post: CommieScum
  Unemployment in the US is higher Helsworth 0 908 22.01.2017 19:32
Last Post: Helsworth
  Ellis Winningham: Finding Cuts to Pay For Federal Spending is Obsolete Helsworth 3 1,895 06.12.2016 23:30
Last Post: VineFynn
  Tax Cut or Spending Increase for Short Term Improvements Metalsie 8 1,792 24.02.2016 18:14
Last Post: yangusbeef
  Unemployment causes 45,000 suicides a year worldwide, finds study Helsworth 0 1,299 11.02.2015 17:34
Last Post: Helsworth
  Mises refutes cyber-libertarians on public spending and debt Helsworth 0 1,397 08.12.2014 16:41
Last Post: Helsworth
  Long-Term Unemployment High, Regardless of Education Helsworth 0 1,020 09.04.2014 19:59
Last Post: Helsworth
  Increased Unemployment Benefits Can Be a Win Win Helsworth 0 1,103 03.04.2014 21:58
Last Post: Helsworth

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: