Quote from: Solar on February 05, 2013, 07:32:29 PM
He was Carl's toady and was usually relegated to kitchen duty.

The unkindest cut of all...

Quote from: three_rights on February 05, 2013, 03:19:13 PM
This is exactly why Conservatives are looked at as being stupid.

If one were to actually read  the writings of John Stuart Mills, Carl Marx, and Milton Friedman they would find no difference between them. 

If you want to understand what this idiot actually believes read John Rawls "Theory of Justice".

Thats a real impressive observation from some one who waltzes in here and can't even Spell Karl Marx's name correctly. Lessee:

In this corner we have Lt General Boykin,  who, in addition to a brilliant military career at the highest levels of natonal defense has an equally impressive career as a professor and academic, sought after guest speaker and is the author of several popular books.

And in the other corner we have....well, we have somebody who already has made a complete fool of himself considering the last few posts.

The honesty is refreshing

Quote from: three_rights on February 05, 2013, 03:19:13 PM
This is exactly why Conservatives are looked at as being stupid.

If one were to actually read  the writings of John Stuart Mills, Carl Marx, and Milton Friedman they would find no difference between them. 

If you want to understand what this idiot actually believes read John Rawls "Theory of Justice".

No, this is why Libertarians are seen as stupid, they post ignorants quips exactly lke yours.
We're waiting for your evidence to your claim.

 
There are plenty differences between the aforementioned individuals.  What are you hopped up on?  The fact that absolute and perfect communism (or socialism) is unattainable by definition and the binding laws of our world suggests they would have differences in their approaches, even to one who has not read them.

Would you like a breakdown?  You can still save yourself the shame. 

The Friedman world that I was referring to was the one with a Minimum Income, Negative taxes, Indexing, Nationalized Banks, and strict Monetary Policy.  I admit that he never directly referred to "nationalized banks", but in practice I fail to see how you could characterize a policy that required savings institutions to maintain 100% reserves, abolished the payment of interest on savings, and relied on federal monetary policy to "grow" the value of savings, as being anything other than "nationalization"

Cheers

Quote from: three_rights on February 07, 2013, 12:06:22 PM
The Friedman world that I was referring to was the one with a Minimum Income, Negative taxes, Indexing, Nationalized Banks, and strict Monetary Policy.  I admit that he never directly referred to "nationalized banks", but in practice I fail to see how you could characterize a policy that required savings institutions to maintain 100% reserves, abolished the payment of interest on savings, and relied on federal monetary policy to "grow" the value of savings, as being anything other than "nationalization"

Cheers

You have CLEARLY never read Friedman, and have no idea what his negative income tax was about.  He was trying to find a solution for the excessive welfare spending.  Minimum wage?? Friedman and Marx where complete opposites. You clearly have no clue about Karl Marx either.

I said "guaranteed minimum income" which was part of Friedman's negative income tax theory of the Early 1960's.  Oh, Yeah, all one would have done to receive the "guaranteed minimum income" under Friedman was send in a tax return; there was no means testing, form filing or even an application process.


His proposal (again from the 50's and 60's) for a full reserve banking system, and the removal of the capital and finance functions from savings institutions are clearly stated in his early works regarding monetary policy and K-percent

Indexing was Friedmans proposed (again from the 50's and 60's) means of dealing with "severe", "unexpected" and "unforeseen" price increases, and is incorporated into his "modified consumption function" and "modified Phillips curve". 

Quote from: three_rights on February 07, 2013, 02:43:43 PM
I said "guaranteed minimum income" which was part of Friedman's negative income tax theory of the Early 1960's.  Oh, Yeah, all one would have done to receive the "guaranteed minimum income" under Friedman was send in a tax return; there was no means testing, form filing or even an application process.

Defrauding the IRS sort of slaps your argument down.

Do I like his idea from a philosophical perspective? No.  Is it better than what we have now?  Far, far better. His idea was something realistic. We'd have a lot less career welfare recipients right now.

Quote
His proposal (again from the 50's and 60's) for a full reserve banking system, and the removal of the capital and finance functions from savings institutions are clearly stated in his early works regarding monetary policy and K-percent

Friedman had ideas and proposals on how to improve things as they existed.  He wanted to end the Federal Reserve, BIS, etc.

QuoteThe Fed was largely responsible for converting what might have been a garden-variety recession, although perhaps a fairly severe one, into a major catastrophe. Instead of using its powers to offset the depression, it presided over a decline in the quantity of money by one-third from 1929 to 1933 ... Far from the depression being a failure of the free-enterprise system, it was a tragic failure of government. -Milton Friedman, "Two Lucky People"

QuoteAny system which gives so much power and so much discretion to a few men, [so] that mistakes ‑‑ excusable or not ‑‑ can have such far reaching effects, is a bad system. It is a bad system to believers in freedom just because it gives a few men such power without any effective check by the body politic ‑‑ this is the key political argument against an independent central bank. . .To paraphrase Clemenceau: money is much too serious a matter to be left to the Central Bankers. -Milton Friedman, "Capitalism and Freedom"

Quote
Indexing was Friedmans proposed (again from the 50's and 60's) means of dealing with "severe", "unexpected" and "unforeseen" price increases, and is incorporated into his "modified consumption function" and "modified Phillips curve".

He had recommendations on how to help the increased money supply under the system AS IT EXISTED, and always qualified it as such.  He has always been a free-market, less government proponent.

Quote from: three_rights on February 07, 2013, 02:43:43 PM
I said "guaranteed minimum income" which was part of Friedman's negative income tax theory of the Early 1960's.  Oh, Yeah, all one would have done to receive the "guaranteed minimum income" under Friedman was send in a tax return; there was no means testing, form filing or even an application process.


His proposal (again from the 50's and 60's) for a full reserve banking system, and the removal of the capital and finance functions from savings institutions are clearly stated in his early works regarding monetary policy and K-percent

Indexing was Friedmans proposed (again from the 50's and 60's) means of dealing with "severe", "unexpected" and "unforeseen" price increases, and is incorporated into his "modified consumption function" and "modified Phillips curve".

Wow.  OK, again, these were solutions for the system AS IT WAS.  He was a realist and had solutions and recommendations on how to improve things that existed.  He knew ending government assistance was a non-starter, so why not propose improvements?  For example, I am anti-income tax, but I would support a flat tax as an improvement of our current system; that doesn't mean I want a flat tax system over the end all solution.

Please don't ever equate a free-market champion with a psychopath hypocrite loser like Karl Marx.

[[[ Cyborg Comment - This DHS Memo should have been labeled "Propaganda created for Obama / Napolitano which was intended to discredit and criminalize Conservatives, Christians, Gun Owners and Veterans to provide justification for labeling them as terrorist and taking military and / or Police action against them! ]]]

URL Link to the ( DHS ) Memo in a downloadable PDF
http://wlstorage.net/file/us-dhs-right-wing-extremism-2009.pdf

(U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment

7 April 2009
(U) Prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment  Threat Analysis Division. Coordinated with FBI.

(U) Scope
(U//FOUO) This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments published by the Extremism and Radicalization  Branch to facilitate a greater understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States. The information is provided to federal, state, local and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying the United States Government sponsorship.
Snip >
Snip>

Start page 2 of 9
(U) Key Finding - Excerpt first sentence
The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.

page 2 of 9 - third par. -Excerpt
Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.

page 2 of 9 last paragraph
(U//FOUO0 The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violet attacks.

page 3 of 9
top of page - first par:
-- (U//FOUO) Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups, as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for violence against the government. The high volume purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement.
second par:
-- (U//FOUO) Returning Veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS?I&A is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.
- - -  -
Excerpt first par: (U) Current Economic and Political Climate
- In addition, the historical election of an African American president and the prospect of policy changes are proving to be a driving force for right wing extremist recruitment and radicalization.

page 3 of 9
thrid par:
(U) Current Economic and Politial Climate
[ One sentence excerpt ] In addition the hirtorical election of an African American president and the prospect of policy changes are proving to be a driving force for right wing extremist recruitment and radicalization.
   [following par:]  A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in right wing extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in Pittsburgh Pennsylvania on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunmans reaction reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in anti-government conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a jewish controlled "One World Government."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Pittsburgh_police_shootings
http://archive.adl.org/learn/extremism_in_the_news/White_Supremacy/poplawski%20report.htm

Cyborg comment. DHS has exploited the above incident. Poplawski was a society dropout gangbanger type , alleged member of stormfront - posted a few times, dishonorably discharged from Marine boot camp in first 2 months, social out cast and had a history of assaults and arrests. He did not and does not represent an organizational trend if attracting others to extreme radicalism as represented by the Stormfront ideology.

Leftits definitions of Right wing extremists....Aka anybody who joins the tea party.

Billy

Quote from: three_rights on February 05, 2013, 03:19:13 PM
This is exactly why Conservatives are looked at as being stupid.

If one were to actually read  the writings of John Stuart Mills, Carl Marx, and Milton Friedman they would find no difference between them. 

If you want to understand what this idiot actually believes read John Rawls "Theory of Justice".

I have read John Stuart Mill, Karl Marx and Milton Friedman (I have their books in my bookshelf) and there are similarities between Friedman and Mill but they have almost nothing in common with Karl Marx. Your posts are nothing but straw man arguments. John Stuart Mill was pro freedom and pro property rights, and so is Milton Friedman, ofc concepts and application of freedom and protection of property rights differ but then again they are decribing two different type of economies and technological societies.

Karl Marx Communist manifesto with Dictarship of the Proletariat is an oxymoron with liberty and protection of property rights. Communism is oligarchy plain and simple.

But thank you for coming in and validating the fact that socialists can't think for themselves.

And regarding the specifics you claimed about Friedman policies sounds like something a 16 year would write for his essay. I agree with "taxed" posts and advise you too actually take the time to read Capitalism and Freedom.

Now, these are spectacularly brilliant statements.

Taxed Wrote "Do I like his idea from a philosophical perspective? No.  Is it better than what we have now?  Far, far better. His idea was something realistic. We'd have a lot less career welfare recipients right now."

Taxed Wrote: "I am anti-income tax, but I would support a flat tax as an improvement of our current system; that doesn't mean I want a flat tax system over the end all solution."


P.S.


Marx, coined the term "Dictatorship of the proletariat" to describe the period of transition from serfdom to a decentralized democracy, in which the Means of Production would be centralized, Private Property would be confiscated, and oppressively progressive tax systems designed to prohibit the accumulation and generational transfer of wealth imposed. Marx viewed  the "Dictatorship of the proletariat" as undesirable but necessary to effectuate the transition from an oppressive, highly centralized feudal system to a decentralized democratic society with a free-market economy.

Our own Civil War as well as the policies of Reconstruction Era, fall into what Marx referred to as "Dictatorship of the proletariat", it along with Tsarist Russia, are also examples of what Friedman categorized as technically free-markets without "political freedom". Friedman was often quoted to say "Free-markets are necessary, but not sufficient for political freedom".

Quote from: three_rights on February 12, 2013, 10:09:58 AM
Now, these are spectacularly brilliant statements.

Taxed Wrote "Do I like his idea from a philosophical perspective? No.  Is it better than what we have now?  Far, far better. His idea was something realistic. We'd have a lot less career welfare recipients right now."

Taxed Wrote: "I am anti-income tax, but I would support a flat tax as an improvement of our current system; that doesn't mean I want a flat tax system over the end all solution."


P.S.


Marx, coined the term "Dictatorship of the proletariat" to describe the period of transition from serfdom to a decentralized democracy, in which the Means of Production would be centralized, Private Property would be confiscated, and oppressively progressive tax systems designed to prohibit the accumulation and generational transfer of wealth imposed. Marx viewed  the "Dictatorship of the proletariat" as undesirable but necessary to effectuate the transition from an oppressive, highly centralized feudal system to a decentralized democratic society with a free-market economy.

Our own Civil War as well as the policies of Reconstruction Era, fall into what Marx referred to as "Dictatorship of the proletariat", it along with Tsarist Russia, are also examples of what Friedman categorized as technically free-markets without "political freedom". Friedman was often quoted to say "Free-markets are necessary, but not sufficient for political freedom".

Are you actually trying to claim Marx was a free market Capitalist?
The two are inseparable, you can't have one without the other.