American Swindle

Way to defend your position with zilch for substance. So I guess all of New York Times is a racist news outlet since they support Sarah Jeong amirite?

The man is one of the rarities in government that has always fought for individual liberty, free markets, sound money and the Constitution, all things that would help minorities (Ending the War on drugs, Anti-War, Keeping our dollar from being over inflated by government interventions/crony capitalism). So my point is his actions are counter to the MS narrative of him being racist. The only thing they had on him was that newsletter, which was written by a staffer for his news letter (debunked from the video I posted above). He took responsibility for it under his name and disavowed it as he did that tweet. Sometimes writers or editors let things slip through and I'm sure Ron Paul's twitter/Institute isn't the only media source that has let racist type articles out that were later disavowed and deleted. Am I wrong?

If you say so Celery. I mean.... if it doesn't walk like a duck, or quack like a duck, then it must be a duck right?

Ron Paul responded to the tweet, disavowing it and deleting it. Are the heads of ESPN all Racists because one of their writers released the article on Jeremy Lin labeled "Chink in the armor"?

I'll take that as you admitting you're wrong about Ron Paul being a racist, so no reason to be down on yourself. Give yourself a pat on the back, you've considered evidence that was contrary to your claim and changed course on your opinion!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yp1gIci6QFs Here's Ron being selfish and helping a Black Man's wife by delivering their baby....tell me what "racist" would voluntarily delivery a baby of a bi-racial couple at no charge?

This is an outright lie and has been proven untrue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=JCjfHeGM8qk

How about no more interventionist wars and no bailouts for banks? I'm really blown away that the Democrats do not seem anti-war anymore. Repeal Citizens United I can get behind, but you start losing me with this almost cult-like adoration for the State to provide everything from cradle to grave. We have healthcare, the issue is why it's so expensive. We have education, hell, you can learn everything you want to know with a quick google search, but again, why is college so expensive?

Well I disagree with those people. For every greedy self-made millionaire, there are other ones that are compassionate and choose to do good with their money without force. Who will regulate your regulators?

WOODS: You have an article alleging that Sweden actually succeeded economically not because of welfare state spending and government intervention, but both in spite of those things and prior to those things. So can we go back and look at the history of Sweden? When do we begin to see robust economic growth, and what was the role of the state at that time? NORBERG: When you start to think of when Sweden was really a successful economy that the rest of the world looked at, you begin to notice Sweden in the 1950s, ’60s. In 1970, Sweden is one of the richest countries on the planet. I think the per-capita income is the fourth most prosperous on the planet, and that’s after a 100-year period of rapid economic growth – one of the fastest in the world. Probably only Japan beat us during those years. So you would have to say that this starts sometime in the 1870s, which is interesting, because at that time Sweden had gone through a liberalization and deregulation process. Between 1840 and 1870, we had a major political movement of classical liberalism, of a laissez-faire liberal attitude where they wanted to reduce government to open up to free trade, deregulating industry and so on. And it’s sort of a funny anecdote: the minister of finance, who was one of the pioneers of these reforms, left in the mid-1860s after having really liberalized and opened Sweden up, and his opponents said, oh, now you’re leaving because you don’t want to see the failures that you brought upon us and the problems that Sweden will experience after these reforms. But what happened was that growth really took hold. If you want to look at one particular set of numbers, between 1860 and 1910, right before the First World War, real wages in Sweden increased by 25 percent per decade in manufacturing. That’s much faster than before and much faster than afterwards – which is interesting, because that’s 20 years before the Social Democrats ever got power in Sweden. So the real boom happened during this laissez-faire period

Sweden's wealth was due to free market capitalism before they implemented their welfare state/progressive policies bro. http://bernieiswrong.com/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNyipnsyBj8

To folks in Bangladesh, our bottom 2 percent is rich to them, should our bottom 2 percent give their things to those in Bangladesh in the name of global economic equality? Lets have some perspective just a little...we live on a planet with 7 billion people on a rock amongst what seems like an infinite number of other planets, some people are just going to have it better than others.

Really? It makes a whole hell of a lot of sense to me. The free market pays based on value, not what government busy bodies and central planners deem appropriate. Take the sick leave ordinance in Austin for example. Good Business owners that want to retain valuable employees and be more competitive in the market *should* consider paying more sick days and more PTO to retain skilled labor, where SHITTY business owners should be allowed to not offer those same benefits. Said shitty companies will not be as competitive and should fizzle out of the market because they lose talent to other businesses that retain employees with better benefits. BUT, you have people that do not want to allow that and *FEEL* that businesses should be mandated to have these benefits in the name of compassion. That's fine and dandy, but it still stands, those that create value command the benefits and more pay whereas those that do not provide value get paid the market price based on their skills.....make sense?

My Three Year Old loves collecting these things

Paul Krugman can smoke a turd. He's a fan boy of the Federal Reserve and gets shellacked by Austrian Economists on a weekly basis. Check out this podcast when you have a moment to learn more: https://contrakrugman.com/category/podcasts/

Tariffs are a crony tool the state uses to protect industries that would otherwise not thrive in the free market. Obama did it for the tire industry and now Trump is slapping duties on stuff coming from China (hell, i got a note from my vendor that a 10% tariff was going to be slapped on hand soap and Toilet Seat Covers) as well as steel and aluminum. It's a political move and protects very few while the consumer loses. Fuck Tariffs.

Doesn't the IRS penalize you if you don't buy insurance right now? Why is the ER so expensive in the first place? It's a systemic issue that I highlighted already (overcharging, ineffecient bureaucratic issues...etc.)

Democratic Replublic? More like Constitutional Republic no? Also, we are in reality an oligarchy (laden with corporatism and crony capitalism).

Why not go back to what we had pre-ACA? Insurance premiums were affordable then. The harsh reality is that the ACA's mandate that insurers insure those with pre-existing conditions no matter what caused two things: 1)Younger, healthy people didn't join thus shrinking the pool of those that paid in (because hell, why pay in when you can get insurance when you get sick!) 2)Those that paid in had to cover the immensely large risk pool of those that should be paying the higher premiums (essentially distorting the health insurance market) so this results in massive premiums for those in the middle class and upper class. Couple those two things with the compounding effects of inefficient 3rd party billing and hospital overcharging (because yeah, they know insurance will pay for it), then you have quite the unsustainable, economic conundrum.

She has no sense of basic economics and is a bit too socialist for my taste. I mean, her main policies are centered around the below: Medicare for All Free Public University Universal Jobs Guarantee Housing as a human right All ideas then are big government in nature and are not based in the realm of free market capitalism. All require government intervention, central planning, and an unquestioned faith in the State. No Thanks.

I'd agree that maybe I'm detached from the constant left-right mainstream fueled hysterical arguing (thankfully), but forgive me if I come off as acting "superior". And yes, my recent exchanges were definitely "straw man" like. To clarify, it is fair for most to criticize the Trump for the way he conducted himself at the Helsinki summit . Point blank. All of Brisket's points are fair and valid. A wise person suggested that those that are for free markets, anti-war, pro-freedom and for limited government build coalitions with the Left and Right where we agree. I think we can agree that war with Russia is not wanted, and open dialogue and communications are a good thing while acknowledging Trump's lackluster performance at the Summit.

Wow you remembered an argument we had from over a year ago?

And what tribe did you assume I was a part of with this?

Christ. FIFY

First, I'm not nor ever was a troll. It appears having a different opinion than the masses on things get's you labeled as such. I asked you if you supported the meeting with Un and you only. Never said you supported the meeting, but asked if you opposed it....a difference. It's all good though bro, remember, pink butcher paper, wrap at 165 internal, and lay off the liquid smoke.