Jump to content
Science Forums

geko

Members
  • Content Count

    398
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

geko last won the day on June 29 2011

geko had the most liked content!

About geko

  • Rank
    Understanding
  • Birthday January 1

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Converted

  • Location
    UK
  1. You deserve merit for your innocence.
  2. That's not an argument mate is it. You're either arguing from the idea that the constitution is enforced or that legislators are elected rather than appointed in the US. Both points are moot due to the constitution being ignored when it suits the executive, just like it is in the UK, and that elections no longer have absolute integrity. The US executive is also responsible for enforcing and implementing the laws written by congress. It appoints the cabinet and agency heads. It also appoints the federal judges, including that of the supreme court. So yes, that is how it is.
  3. Just because the US constitution puts checks on the branch's doesn't mean the checks are respected. The old saying that "absolute power cannot be found in a republic" no longer holds. The executive in a republic has the same power as they do in a democracy.
  4. The US constitution is a joke, no offense. It doesn't work. It never worked. This 'founding fathers' just always sounds like emotional sentiment to me espousing belief in there being some 'objective benefactors and protectors' that we can fall back on to 'tell us what's right'... or maybe that's just my UK cynicism. Absolute power resides in the executive like always. They appoint the legislators, which governs the judiciary.
  5. Where are you getting 3% US inflation from? If we use seasonally adjusted M1 only it's ~10% annually (~1% monthly), for the last 2 years. Considering the US population growth rate is ~1% this is a factor of 10 higher than even that proposed by a monetarist theory. This is one of the problems with limiting this type of discussion to a strict Keynesian principle like JM seems to suggest as even though the topic is about fiscal policy the main discussion should be monetary policy as after they inflate to offset depression they continue to inflate to force growth. So whether it's Keynesian or mo
  6. Which is why people support inflation. There's no end for a monetary policy that relies on constant growth. Any drop in increased demand and we get problems again. Inflationary policy, by extension, necessarily causes inefficient resource allocation; unless we think, for example, that the last growth period was beneficial because people had employment and businesses were producing and that the now idle constructions were an efficient allocation of resources and labour. If i may i'd like to ask my question again in hope of an answer. Why do some of you think that depreciating a currency makes
  7. Everyone carries a part of society on his shoulders; no one is relieved of his or her responsibility by others, and no one can find a safe way out if society is sweeping towards destruction. Whether he chooses or not, every man is drawn into the historical struggle, the decisive battle into which our epoch has plunged us. ~Ludwig Von Mises
  8. A tyrant is fond of making wars as a means of keeping his subjects in employment and in continual need of a commander. ~Aristotle War, armed conflict between organised political groups, has been the universal norm in human history. ~Sir Michael Howard.
  9. The true and equitable law of humanity is the free exchange of service for service. Spoliation consists in destroying by force or by trickery the freedom of exchange, in order to receive a service without rendering one. Forcible spoliation is exercised thus: Wait till a man has produced something; then take it away from him by violence. When practiced by one individual on another, it is called robbery, and leads to the prison; when practiced among nations, it takes the name of conquest, and leads to glory. ~Bastiat
  10. it wasn't a direct attack on you mate it was just a comment on the article.
  11. This thread is getting a bit silly. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/us/14census.html?pagewanted=all There's nothing in this article that would suggest or imply causation or correlation between making the rich richer by making the middle class poorer. Nash equilibrium is just a name for perfect knowledge in competition. Of course the market likes quantitative easing, i.e. printing money, aka. inflation. It's free money, and free interest for the creditors on money that never existed previously. Why do some of you think you can make poor people wealthier by depreciating their curren
  12. ...hmm, that's not right either because wouldn't you need reason to have belief in koran? Bah, philosophy confuses me, why did i bother posting...
  13. Interesting. I generally move forward under the assumption of reason 1 > belief > reason 2 > cause > effect. So in context it would be, say, koran > belief in koran > want to experience what koran promises > motivation to act in a manner that you see promises being realised (e.g. kill infidels) > suicide bomb I think this assumes objective reasons though whereas cause > reason > effect assumes subjective? I don't know… and think i'm actually inconsistent here as i swap between objective and subjective depending on how easy it is to think of things. No doubt
  14. This is very true, and is one of the reasons for continued growth. The trouble we have is that the system is kept afloat with the growth. How does an inflationary policy that stimulates growth by injecting new money into the economy as interest bearing debt fix the problem? It just shifts it to the next cycle, taking the necessarily increasing defaults and, therefore, the poverty along with it. The practical absurdity of this system is as plain as day in the last growth cycle. We have 10's of millions of new houses across the world left vacant. Yes, we had growth, which people think is wonderf
×
×
  • Create New...