OK what's the answer?

[Johnnyorganic]

So you consider Ann Rand to be a relevant voice in philosophy. She is a raver. She is a one minded oppressor of Ideas other than her own. Yes I agree, she definently speils greed is good, or greed is God for that matter, however that does not make her right.

As a matter of fact I do, but that is not why I posted it. I posted it to dispute and disprove your claim.

Please provide me an example where Ayn Rand seeks to oppress ideas other than her own.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Just one small question: If academia is slanted towards the left as you alluded to, and academia is where knowledge is stored, Maybe they actually have a valid point. Maybe our country has been overtaken by the "military industrial complex". Maybe greed has destroyed the country and the average "Dude" has not a chance of ever achieving the "American dream". Maybe the right is wrong. It seems that greed is the engine that drives capitalism. In every philosophical treatise known to man, Greed has been shown to be a destroyer of all things human. Maybe it is time for a change. The how to is the difficult part as greed is "human nature". This however does not make it right.

I think I like the new and soft-spoken Medicineman, I guess I left RIU a little while before you did, so I wasn't aware you had left. Welcome back. I do have a response.

First of all, academia is not where knowledge is stored. I reserve that description for my public library or even Amazon.com. To quote Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting "you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin education you coulda got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library ". It wasn't until I left school that I started to gain knowledge without the obvious bias of a professor interfering with that goal.

The point is the same as the long running exchange of emails I've had with news coordinators of Yahoo. I continue to chastise them for their obvious bias in providing only stories that support a progressive agenda. I provide them with statistics that show the bias and always get back polite emails saying that they aren't responsible for the content of the articles, so they aren't showing bias and that I need to contact the author of the story or report. The bias is in the selection of articles, not the articles individually. This is the same bias that pervades academia, either ignoring ideas, authors, studies or viewpoints that don't gibe with the professor or showing thinly disguised contempt as these are presented. It is indoctrination of progressive ideals, pure and simple. And it's rubbish.

I'm living proof that the average dude can achieve the American Dream. No degree, self educated, low income background, military service, started a small business and worked hard. Retired almost four years ago at age 37 and haven't actually worked a day in 6 years. Fortunately, I listened to all the nutjobs like Peter Schiff and Glenn Beck and took my investments out of the stock market in the summer of 08 before the market tanked. Then I listened to them again and reinvested this spring and caught it on the way up. Man, I wish I wasn't such a moron, listening to these guys who keep getting it right.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

On your dismissive attempt to paint Any Rand as a "raver": I'm willing to take your word for it as I consider you an expert on the subject.

https://www.rollitup.org/politics/220100-right-wing-site.html
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/223964-idiots-vs-lefties.html
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/209029-ha-dems-got-magic-60-a.html
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/187417-messages-left.html
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/2885-so-you-want-libertarian.html
https://www.rollitup.org/politics/2310-vote.html

I could do this all day....


Didn't you leave?

Welcome back.

 

[medicineman]

I think I like the new and soft-spoken Medicineman, I guess I left RIU a little while before you did, so I wasn't aware you had left. Welcome back. I do have a response.

First of all, academia is not where knowledge is stored. I reserve that description for my public library or even Amazon.com. To quote Matt Damon in Good Will Hunting "you dropped a hundred and fifty grand on a fuckin education you coulda got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library ". It wasn't until I left school that I started to gain knowledge without the obvious bias of a professor interfering with that goal.

The point is the same as the long running exchange of emails I've had with news coordinators of Yahoo. I continue to chastise them for their obvious bias in providing only stories that support a progressive agenda. I provide them with statistics that show the bias and always get back polite emails saying that they aren't responsible for the content of the articles, so they aren't showing bias and that I need to contact the author of the story or report. The bias is in the selection of articles, not the articles individually. This is the same bias that pervades academia, either ignoring ideas, authors, studies or viewpoints that don't gibe with the professor or showing thinly disguised contempt as these are presented. It is indoctrination of progressive ideals, pure and simple. And it's rubbish.

I'm living proof that the average dude can achieve the American Dream. No degree, self educated, low income background, military service, started a small business and worked hard. Retired almost four years ago at age 37 and haven't actually worked a day in 6 years. Fortunately, I listened to all the nutjobs like Peter Schiff and Glenn Beck and took my investments out of the stock market in the summer of 08 before the market tanked. Then I listened to them again and reinvested this spring and caught it on the way up. Man, I wish I wasn't such a moron, listening to these guys who keep getting it right.

Maybe you're just lucky, some people have that blessing. I'm quite sure hard work is also a factor, but getting your financial info from a TV news pundit is pretty lame, I'd have to say luck was that factor.

 

[hanimmal]

Fortunately, I listened to all the nutjobs like Peter Schiff and Glenn Beck and took my investments out of the stock market in the summer of 08 before the market tanked.

http://www.finfacts.com/irelandbusinessnews/publish/article_1011214.shtml
Sep 20, 2007, 06:10

Yale University economics professor Robert Shiller, whose book Irrational Exuberance, predicted the end of the high-tech stock bubble, warned that the housing crisis may well trigger a recession despite interest rate cuts.

"I am worried that the collapse of home prices might turn out to be the most severe since the Great Depression," Shiller, a longtime analyst of real estate, said in testimony before a Congressional committee.

Most legit economists had already forcasted this before the talking heads jumped on it.

It was just that the people in charge did jack all to stop it, when they had plenty of warning to do so.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

I certainly wasn't suggesting that Mr. Schiff was the only person screaming into the wind about the upcoming financial crisis. There were many. I point to Mr. Schiff specifically because of the numerous times he was mocked and outright laughed at by all the financial experts on MSNBC, Fox News and many others. And I actually learn more from these individuals by reading their works than I could ever get from the small amount of exposure they get on TV.

It's not just about getting my info from pundits, I listen to what they're saying and usually go with my gut feeling. When there's a guy making perfect sense and another guy that is telling me to risk my hard earned savings on some flowery, rediculous belief the emperor has clothes, my decision is easy.

 

[hanimmal]

I certainly wasn't suggesting that Mr. Schiff was the only person screaming into the wind about the upcoming financial crisis. There were many. I point to Mr. Schiff specifically because of the numerous times he was mocked and outright laughed at by all the financial experts on MSNBC, Fox News and many others. And I actually learn more from these individuals by reading their works than I could ever get from the small amount of exposure they get on TV.

It's not just about getting my info from pundits, I listen to what they're saying and usually go with my gut feeling. When there's a guy making perfect sense and another guy that is telling me to risk my hard earned savings on some flowery, rediculous belief the emperor has clothes, my decision is easy.

Ah I see. Well first off your gut feeling definanlty seems to have worked well for you and congrats on that.

I am just trying to point out that they got their talking points from the people with science in their pocket.

And would like to say too that just because were right there, doesn't mean that everything they say is legit. They are doomsayers and don't always care where that information is coming from.

If what the actual scientists say is not sexy enough or comes to be believed by most the people and loses its sex appeal they simply move onto the next scare tactic.

That is how they sell ads, and make their money.

If people would just get their news from the people that are crunching the numbers, and reporting the side of their debates, it would be a far less scary place.

Imagine if America was educated and saw these economists saying this was going to happen, and not busy talking about Bush's patriot act that really nobody read. Imagine if instead of all that anger it was placed into a loud yell about not letting the economy tank.


Edit:

The reason it made sense and you pulled out your money could have been because the economists were giving the real information.

I don't think though that you are going to pack up and move out of the country for fear of Obama fake death panels.

 

[ViRedd]

Yes, one step at a time, remove the sinister players, good. I believe the removal of lobbiests is the most crucial element of change to our government.

I thought you left the forum. Just couldn't stay away, could you?

I happen to agree with your statement above ... but based upon hundreds of your past posts, you certainly won't agree with my solution to the lobbyist problem.

The solution would be to repeal the 16th Amendment and abolish the IRS. Lobbyists are after preferential tax treatment for their clients. A simple excise (sales) tax would solve the problem.

Vi

 

[Cap K]

It seems everyone has a bitch about the current and past governments of this and other countries, But no solutions. So, what are some solutions? What can "we the people do"? Outside of all out insurgency, and even including that, what are your solutions? Remember, anyone can bitch. My first order of business would be to quit this partisan bullshit and get organized, I know, the hardest part, And no, I don't know how to accomplish this.

Medicineman started a good thread here with an important question and for the first few pages it stayed on topic. Now the thread has been highjacked by people insulting each other and not really offering too much helpful information. I post this with the hopes that someone will help get
Med's thread back on point.

 

[CrackerJax]

Yes, Med Man wants to get rid of the organizations....... and get....organized. That sure was a great point.

The reason why there is partisan politics is because BASICALLY the Democrats do not adhere to the principles of sound business and economic growth.

If both parties came to the realization that yes indeed, low tax rates do increase Govt. revenue. (it does, every time)

If both parties recognized that the border needs to be secure and Americans kept safe, all over the globe. Everyone with a US BC is an American, everyone else.... isn't.

If both parties realized that the education of the nation is not their responsibility, nor their mandate.

If both parties recognized that free trade without barriers is the surest way to success.

If both parties understood that they work for the voter, and not the other way around.

If both parties could not vote for themselves what is not already given in kind to the voter.

If both parties realized that diplomacy is important, but has it's limitations. Once that limit is reached, all should become one, and stay the course.



Of course, we could just get rid of the organizations...... and get organized.

 

[fdd2blk]

Medicineman started a good thread here with an important question and for the first few pages it stayed on topic. Now the thread has been highjacked by people insulting each other and not really offering too much helpful information. I post this with the hopes that someone will help get
Med's thread back on point.

welcome to RIU's politics section.

 

[TheBrutalTruth]

1. Expand the size of the House to 10,034 or Population of United States/30,000 (1 Representative per 30,000 citizens)

I personally think that action alone would cause the lobbyists to lose a lot of influence as where it is possible for them to influence two or three elections in each state monetarily it would be infinitely harder for them to do so with thirty or forty elections in each state, because the return on investment would go down, and their attempts to purchase influence would likely result in them costing the politicans votes instead of gaining politicians votes.

2. Require any state that is benefitting from pork to fund the pork out of their own budget, and for any budget deficits to be balanced by the states (as it is routinely their senators and representatives that are passing the pork.) This would provide an incentive for states to keep a tight rein on the largesse of their senators and representatives as their actions would directly impact the states.

3. Balanced budget Amendment (ties into the above.)

4. Term limits for Senators (but not the members of the newly expanded house as they will be under infinitely more scrutiny if they are held directly accountable by their neighbors. Makes it much harder for them to say they remembered what was in the best interests of their community if their community can point to the fact that the bill the representative voted for cost them jobs, and thus it would ensure a higher turnover of bad politicians in favor of good statesman.)

5. Specifically ban the usage of the fictional power of Executive Orders

6. Audit the Federal Reserve (and if it is truly guilty of manipulating the markets for its own benefit, or that of its members dissolve it.)

7. Require the states to operate within a balanced budget (as they were required to do by having the authority to issue bills of credit stripped out of their hands by the Constitution.)

8. Reduce Government wages so that the average (including benefits) matches that offered by private enterprises.

I think that's a sufficiently major, non-partisan list.

I said my piece.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

Medicineman started a good thread here with an important question and for the first few pages it stayed on topic. Now the thread has been highjacked by people insulting each other and not really offering too much helpful information. I post this with the hopes that someone will help get Med's thread back on point.

This thread is a farce. Why? Because the OP already knows the answer.

Otherwise he would not automatically pooh-pooh suggestions made by those not of his political leanings. When one asks a question such as the topic of this thread, one should be prepared to give equal consideration to all suggestions rather than dismiss some out of hand.

I said my piece.

As did I.

 

[CrackerJax]

So the answer would be for Med Man to get himself educated.

I'm done too.