His coming out against the Civil Rights Act is logical. In a Free-Market a bigot's business will eventually go bellyup as a non-bigot will set up shop right next door and drive him out of business. Thus, the bigot either volunteerism changes his mentality and actions or the free-market marginalizes him.
If this logic is so sound, then why didn't slavery and segregation wither and die of their own accord?
Oh, that's right: because they were supported by the state governments in question. That's why we had to use the federal government to force them to stop doing that and get rid of the bigotry.
You can't use government to change society.
Yes we can. We have done so, successfully, repeatedly.
Not only is that immoral, it doesn't work.
And yet, we're free of slavery and segregation. Funny, that.
Are you asserting that the moral downside of the Civil War was not justified by the moral upside of ending slavery? Or that the moral downside of forcing states to end segregation was not worth the moral upside of ending segregation?
Because that's Ron Paul's position. He values the lives of white slave-holders over the freedom of black slaves. He values the "right" of white businessmen to racially discriminate over the right of black citizens to freedom. Those are the principles you're defending with your "turn back the clock to the 1700s" advocacy.
Think about this. An economist stated today the Germany also "benefited" by the Greeks borrowing and buying all those cars because it meant Germans had a lot of work and kept their unemployment down. Can you see the inherent stupidity in this statement?
That statement is both obviously true and uncontroversial. You're a crank if you think otherwise.
As if 'working' in and of itself is 'good'.
Reduced unemployment is an unambiguous economic "good," in the view of almost everyone.
Yeah, they didn't get paid, but, they did get to work for 'free' (essentially slavery) so that Greeks got to drive brand-new Porche's.
They got paid. What are you blathering about?
They look at Fukushima and say: "WOW! This is going to be wonderful for the Japanese. look at all the work! It'll probably take 2 or 3 generations and lots and lots of borrowing to maybe get back to a semblance of normality. That's just great for 'stimulating' the Japanese economy."
Nobody says that. You're attacking a strawman, as usual.
This is why you see Nobel Prize winning Douche bags like Krugmen suggesting WWIII or an Alien Invasion would be just 'wonderful for the economy'. AND, guess what? That's music to the ears of the Military Industrial Complex.
Is there supposed to be a point in this incoherent rant, somewhere?
This is why Ron Paul is marginalized and made to sound like a loon by the lame-stream media. He'd cut the military budget.
That's a highly unpopular policy position, regardless of anything the media does or doesn't say. It doesn't require a conspiracy theory to marginalize a fringe candidate with radical ideas that are repellent to the overwhelming majority of voters. It should be pretty clear to anyone with even the most basic understanding of the function of markets that such a candidate will not attract a huge audience.
Meanwhile, are you blind to the delicious irony of an incoherent crank blaming "the media" for the fact that another incoherent crank isn't taken seriously?
Did you hear Obama's response to BJ Morgan's loosing $2 BILLION (and could reach as high as $20 Billion)? That's why we instilled Regulatory Reform.
Come again? So..... the regulation did nothing, and, this is why we have it?
Except that we
don't have the regulations, exactly because the likes of JP Morgan and their apologists have been resisting such.
Do try to keep up, eh?
that aside, I noticed you're now reaching back to the 1700s.
Pointing out that originalists are just that is not the same thing as recommending a return to the 1700s.
Look, you can reach all the way back to 500BCE. Some of those ideals are STILL the ideal.
Like slavery? Reserving the franchise for white, male landowners?
It's not like suddenly we'd unlearn math.
In point of fact, I doubt very much that you ever learned any math that's nearly as recent as the 1700s.
The world would still be a modern world.
Just without a modern government to cope with it.
If you had complete, coherent answers to how your favored approach would satisfactorily deal with the various issues that the modern government was devised to address, then we could maybe take this stuff seriously. But you're attempting the usual libertarian end-run around all that, simply invoking some idealized past and uncritically demanding we return to it.
Although, the situation is getting dire. Why don't you try this experiment. Ask a younger research to identify the independent and dependent variable and how to run a single factor analysis - what assumptions are made. Ask them to describe the Scientific Method.
They won't know it. Yeah, the older ones will (or might). But not the younger ones. Or not many of them.
WTF are you going on about now?
Did you know one of the reason why Rome fell? As the economy tanked they hired less professionals. This in turn lead to less people being trained how to do skilled jobs. Take the Pantheon as an example. The largest single cast dome made - ever. Still in use after nearly 2000 years. It's almost perfect. And it was the peak. Why didn't they get better? Because people had less money to spend as the State sucked it up. Less money meant less people to do those sorts of works. In less then a couple hundred years people not only couldn't do those skilled jobs. They didn't even know how to make that kind of cement! They thought some of the structures their grandparents parents had made... were made by the Giants in the Bible.
History Repeats itself. Why is that do you think?
Again, we get treated to this rootless, masturbatory rhetoric and receive zero serious answers to any of the relevant issues. You're all empty grandstanding and bluster, and zero comprehension. Why do you imagine that you can go around lecturing people about issues you demonstrably have no grasp on?