LOTFI: Dear Neocons, Rand Paul Is Right On Military Spending
- Thread starter ZakCarter
- Start date
evince
Truthmatters
cawacko
Well-known member
He wasn't talking about the war Desh. And you said 'your fucks' and 'you all' to him? Either you don't know how to comprehend what you are reading or you are trolling this man on purpose.
cawacko
Well-known member
Why are still a Democrat after LBJ?
cawacko
Well-known member
Ahhh, so you no one who is a Democrat after 1965 then can be trusted. Maybe that's why the South turned Republican.
evince
Truthmatters
because hes been worm food for decades you stupid fuck
evince
Truthmatters
the people who lied us to war are alive and in your party
cawacko
Well-known member
Oh, so long should you leave a party after its President lies you to war before coming back?
cawacko
Well-known member
You don't have to prove you served to Evince.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Be careful giving out personal info here chief, we have some crazy users.
Like Evince, one of the biggest shit posters in Internet history. Be sure to ignore and threadban her in the future.
evince
Truthmatters
I admire your dedication
My problem with ron paul is hes insane
He is an adherent of the Austrian school of economics.
that is the short bus school of economics that is run like a cult instead of an intellectual endeavor.
Ron Paul is not a good man.
he advocates economic ideas that are historically failed ideas that will destroy this country.
sorry to be so plain spoken but we don't have time for lies and making nice about evil .
this country is at stake
evince
Truthmatters
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_School
General criticisms[edit]
Mainstream economists have argued that Austrians are often averse to the use of mathematics and statistics in economics.[71] However, independent scholar Martin Sibileau, in 2014, suggested a logics-based approach for a definitive formalization of the Austrian thought.[72]
Economist Bryan Caplan argues that many Austrians have not understood valid contributions of modern mainstream economics, causing them to overstate their differences with it. For example, Murray Rothbard stated that he objected to the use of cardinal utility in microeconomic theory. Caplan says that Rothbard did not understand the position he was attacking, because microeconomic theorists go to great pains to show that their results are derived for any monotonic transformation of an ordinal utility function, and do not entail cardinal utility.[59][73] The result is that conclusions about utility preferences hold no matter what values are assigned to them.[citation needed]
Economist Paul Krugman has stated that because Austrians do not use "explicit models" they are unaware of holes in their own thinking.[74]
Economist Benjamin Klein has criticized the economic methodological work of Austrian economist Israel M. Kirzner. While praising Kirzner for highlighting shortcomings in traditional methodology, Klein argued that Kirzner did not provide a viable alternative for economic methodology.[75] Economist Tyler Cowen has written that Kirzner's theory of entrepreneurship can ultimately be reduced to a neoclassical search model and is thus not in the radical subjectivist tradition of Austrian praxeology. Cowen states that Kirzner's entrepreneurs can be modeled in mainstream terms of search.[76]
Economist Jeffrey Sachs argues that among developed countries, those with high rates of taxation and high social welfare spending perform better on most measures of economic performance compared to countries with low rates of taxation and low social outlays. He concludes that Friedrich Hayek was wrong to argue that high levels of government spending harms an economy, and "a generous social-welfare state is not a road to serfdom but rather to fairness, economic equality and international competitiveness."[77] Austrian economist Sudha Shenoy responded by arguing that countries with large public sectors have grown more slowly.[78]
Economist Bryan Caplan has noted that Mises has been criticized as allegedly overstating the strength of his case in describing socialism as impossible rather than as something that would need to establish non-market institutions to deal with the inefficiency.
General criticisms[edit]
Mainstream economists have argued that Austrians are often averse to the use of mathematics and statistics in economics.[71] However, independent scholar Martin Sibileau, in 2014, suggested a logics-based approach for a definitive formalization of the Austrian thought.[72]
Economist Bryan Caplan argues that many Austrians have not understood valid contributions of modern mainstream economics, causing them to overstate their differences with it. For example, Murray Rothbard stated that he objected to the use of cardinal utility in microeconomic theory. Caplan says that Rothbard did not understand the position he was attacking, because microeconomic theorists go to great pains to show that their results are derived for any monotonic transformation of an ordinal utility function, and do not entail cardinal utility.[59][73] The result is that conclusions about utility preferences hold no matter what values are assigned to them.[citation needed]
Economist Paul Krugman has stated that because Austrians do not use "explicit models" they are unaware of holes in their own thinking.[74]
Economist Benjamin Klein has criticized the economic methodological work of Austrian economist Israel M. Kirzner. While praising Kirzner for highlighting shortcomings in traditional methodology, Klein argued that Kirzner did not provide a viable alternative for economic methodology.[75] Economist Tyler Cowen has written that Kirzner's theory of entrepreneurship can ultimately be reduced to a neoclassical search model and is thus not in the radical subjectivist tradition of Austrian praxeology. Cowen states that Kirzner's entrepreneurs can be modeled in mainstream terms of search.[76]
Economist Jeffrey Sachs argues that among developed countries, those with high rates of taxation and high social welfare spending perform better on most measures of economic performance compared to countries with low rates of taxation and low social outlays. He concludes that Friedrich Hayek was wrong to argue that high levels of government spending harms an economy, and "a generous social-welfare state is not a road to serfdom but rather to fairness, economic equality and international competitiveness."[77] Austrian economist Sudha Shenoy responded by arguing that countries with large public sectors have grown more slowly.[78]
Economist Bryan Caplan has noted that Mises has been criticized as allegedly overstating the strength of his case in describing socialism as impossible rather than as something that would need to establish non-market institutions to deal with the inefficiency.
cawacko
Well-known member
You are so absolutely clueless it continues to amaze.
First off it's Rand Paul not Ron Paul.
Second, do you not see who he is addressing with this post? Look at the title. He put NeoCons in the title. Look at the website he posted. It's a liberal site.
He's saying to neo-cons on the right that Rand Paul is right about military spending. He's not saying vote for Rand Paul.
I mean seriously, what is wrong with you?