Here's a question for all those supposed conservative capitalists out there,
- Thread starter archives
- Start date
Yeah.....who takes a vacation in the heart of hurricane season ..especially with the 3 week notice of what what waiting for them in the Caribbean? As I said previously.....those who have more faith in Big Brother than I do. Ain't free will a grand thing? It was their decision now they must live or "die" with the consequences thereof or hope there are enough price gouging reserves to bail them out with the limited supplies that always occur during such natural disasters.
Your "hypothetical" is exactly the reason that a "utopian" society awaiting right...err...left around the corner is a social pipe dream. As long as mankind has free will there are some things that will always be walking hand and hand with them.
Poverty, injury, and sickness will always exist due to a variety of circumstances that are uncontrollable.... accidental circumstance such as injury or natural disaster, disease..etc, which can and does lead to incapacity, and more than one might think....many people simply choose to remain poor due to the free will choices they make, many people are injured or worse "killed" for the exact some reason...poor decision making.
As Jesus said in the Word of God, "You will ALWAYS have the poor among you." -- John 12:8
No where in scripture is it taught that poverty can and will be eliminated, no where is it taught that Jesus came to earth to eliminate poverty or illness, things that are natural to the human condition.
What the scriptures teach is the truth that Jesus came to earth to save mankind's spiritual soul. Helping with poverty is an individual free will choice based upon compassion...but, regardless of how much compassion exists...poverty will always exist in its natural state. Its the duty of a Christian to show compassion first and foremost at home and in his/her own neighborhood where they can directly witness who needs help and who does not.
The entire point is the fact that FREE WILL exists and many times people make the wrong life decisions....like those hypothetical folks stranded on the highway with the big "E" light flashing. Believe me....IF I was on that same highway and I saw a family in need and had reserves....I would indeed have compassion on them. But you can't always count on the individual compassion of anyone and for sure you can't count on Big Brother for compassion as you have been designated to be nothing but a NUMBER. You will be counted as either a "survivor" or a "victim" when the counting takes place.
Last edited:
SmarterthanYou
rebel
we've talked for years about there not being a free market. In light of this, what do you consider a 'free' market?
Buckly J. Ewer
Racism Whistleblower
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
lol dude.....corn subsidies ended five years ago......
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Yes. That would be me. Why would I look out for you?
If you were on fire, I would tell you I was handing you water but it would really be gasoline. Then I would film your screams and post it on YouTube.
The only place your going to find a free market is in your local farmers's market where the seller has little control over price but entry into the market is open and accessible
America's economy today is for the most part controlled by oligopolies with a good deal of control over price and entry is limited
Cancel 2018.1
New member
Remembering Nixon’s Wage and Price Controls
By Gene Healy
This article appeared in The DC Examiner on August 16, 2011.
Remember “TARP,” “Too Big to Fail,” “Government Motors,” “pay czar,” the buzzwords of the Bush-Obama era? They reflected a disturbing trend toward presidential interference in economic life.
Forty years ago this week, President Richard Nixon showed us just how dangerous unchecked executive power can be to the free-enterprise system.
On Aug. 15, 1971, in a nationally televised address, Nixon announced, “I am today ordering a freeze on all prices and wages throughout the United States.”
After a 90-day freeze, increases would have to be approved by a “Pay Board” and a “Price Commission,” with an eye toward eventually lifting controls — conveniently, after the 1972 election.
Putting the U.S. economy “into a permanent straitjacket would … stifle the expansion of our free enterprise system,” Nixon said. As President George W. Bush put it in 2008, sometimes you have to “abandon free-market principles to save the free-market system.”
There was no national emergency in the summer of ‘71: unemployment stood at 6 percent, inflation only a point higher than it is now. Yet, after Nixon’s announcement, the markets rallied, the press swooned, and, even though his speech pre-empted the popular Western Bonanza, the people loved it, too — 75 percent backed the plan in polls.
As Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman correctly predicted, however, Nixon’s gambit ended “in utter failure and the emergence into the open of the suppressed inflation.” The people would pay the price — but not until after he’d coasted to a landslide re-election in 1972 over Democratic Sen. George McGovern.
By the time Nixon reimposed a temporary freeze in June 1973, Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw explain in The Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy, it was obvious that price controls didn’t work: “Ranchers stopped shipping their cattle to the market, farmers drowned their chickens, and consumers emptied the shelves of supermarkets.”
Several lessons from Nixon’s folly remain highly relevant today.
First, it’s usually Congress that lays the foundation for an imperial presidency with unconstitutional delegations of authority to the executive branch. The Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 gave Nixon legislative cover for his actions.
The act was “a political dare,” according to top Nixon official George Shultz — the Democrats thought Nixon wouldn’t use the powers they’d granted him, but he called their bluff.
Second, the damage presidents do with economic powers they shouldn’t have can take years to repair. Price hikes from the 1973 Arab oil embargo made it politically difficult to unwind controls on gasoline, which led to the gas lines of the late 1970s.
Third, the episode shows the enduring relevance of cartoonist Walt Kelly’s Pogo Principle: “We have met the enemy and he is us.” As noted, the freeze was overwhelmingly popular. “Bold” presidential action on the economy often is, even when “just stand there — don’t do something!” would be wiser counsel.
In the recent debt-limit fight, for example, liberal Democrats who’d spent eight years railing against Bush’s executive unilateralism begged Obama to break the law and unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, using a fig leaf of a constitutional argument based on the 14th Amendment.
Occasionally, though, we learn something from our mistakes. As Shultz told Nixon in 1973, at least the debacle had convinced everyone “that wage-price controls are not the answer.”
Ironically, Nixon’s actions also helped galvanize an emerging libertarian movement opposed to the bipartisan welfare-warfare state. “I remember the day very clearly,” Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, recalled in 2001, saying the events of Aug. 15, 1971, drove the reluctant young obstetrician into politics.
For years, Paul waged a one-man war against economic nostrums and presidential command and control. Lately, though — with the rise of the Tea Party and his strong showing in the Ames straw poll — he’s not looking so lonely anymore.
By Gene Healy
This article appeared in The DC Examiner on August 16, 2011.
Remember “TARP,” “Too Big to Fail,” “Government Motors,” “pay czar,” the buzzwords of the Bush-Obama era? They reflected a disturbing trend toward presidential interference in economic life.
Forty years ago this week, President Richard Nixon showed us just how dangerous unchecked executive power can be to the free-enterprise system.
On Aug. 15, 1971, in a nationally televised address, Nixon announced, “I am today ordering a freeze on all prices and wages throughout the United States.”
After a 90-day freeze, increases would have to be approved by a “Pay Board” and a “Price Commission,” with an eye toward eventually lifting controls — conveniently, after the 1972 election.
Putting the U.S. economy “into a permanent straitjacket would … stifle the expansion of our free enterprise system,” Nixon said. As President George W. Bush put it in 2008, sometimes you have to “abandon free-market principles to save the free-market system.”
There was no national emergency in the summer of ‘71: unemployment stood at 6 percent, inflation only a point higher than it is now. Yet, after Nixon’s announcement, the markets rallied, the press swooned, and, even though his speech pre-empted the popular Western Bonanza, the people loved it, too — 75 percent backed the plan in polls.
As Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman correctly predicted, however, Nixon’s gambit ended “in utter failure and the emergence into the open of the suppressed inflation.” The people would pay the price — but not until after he’d coasted to a landslide re-election in 1972 over Democratic Sen. George McGovern.
By the time Nixon reimposed a temporary freeze in June 1973, Daniel Yergin and Joseph Stanislaw explain in The Commanding Heights: The Battle for the World Economy, it was obvious that price controls didn’t work: “Ranchers stopped shipping their cattle to the market, farmers drowned their chickens, and consumers emptied the shelves of supermarkets.”
Several lessons from Nixon’s folly remain highly relevant today.
First, it’s usually Congress that lays the foundation for an imperial presidency with unconstitutional delegations of authority to the executive branch. The Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 gave Nixon legislative cover for his actions.
The act was “a political dare,” according to top Nixon official George Shultz — the Democrats thought Nixon wouldn’t use the powers they’d granted him, but he called their bluff.
Second, the damage presidents do with economic powers they shouldn’t have can take years to repair. Price hikes from the 1973 Arab oil embargo made it politically difficult to unwind controls on gasoline, which led to the gas lines of the late 1970s.
Third, the episode shows the enduring relevance of cartoonist Walt Kelly’s Pogo Principle: “We have met the enemy and he is us.” As noted, the freeze was overwhelmingly popular. “Bold” presidential action on the economy often is, even when “just stand there — don’t do something!” would be wiser counsel.
In the recent debt-limit fight, for example, liberal Democrats who’d spent eight years railing against Bush’s executive unilateralism begged Obama to break the law and unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, using a fig leaf of a constitutional argument based on the 14th Amendment.
Occasionally, though, we learn something from our mistakes. As Shultz told Nixon in 1973, at least the debacle had convinced everyone “that wage-price controls are not the answer.”
Ironically, Nixon’s actions also helped galvanize an emerging libertarian movement opposed to the bipartisan welfare-warfare state. “I remember the day very clearly,” Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, recalled in 2001, saying the events of Aug. 15, 1971, drove the reluctant young obstetrician into politics.
For years, Paul waged a one-man war against economic nostrums and presidential command and control. Lately, though — with the rise of the Tea Party and his strong showing in the Ames straw poll — he’s not looking so lonely anymore.
Don't know if I would buy all of that, certainly don't recall the empty "shelves of supermarkets," nor would I say the inflation later that decade were caused by Nixon's price controls
All of the arguments against price controls, and we are talking here minimum, temporary price controls, ie. water in Florida for couple of days, are fine on paper, but in reality they face ethical concerns, the Gov't attempts to make sure that in an emergency everyone has equal access to necessities, and price controls often is the only way to achieve that goal
The Sage of Main Street
Verified User
All for One, and That One All for Himself
You think you ran a business, but it was your employees who made "your" business run. It's a team, not a one-man show.
The Sage of Main Street
Verified User
Only in the former Soviet Union or a NAZI regime (The national SOCIALIST German workers party)....is it patriotic to mandate anyone to sell, purchase, save...anything to do with the market place. Strange that the soviet union and the nazis shared one common trait (SOCIALISM) while both mandated that the state own all property. History teaches us that Socialism in its purest form is one of the most evil entities to have ever been created by mankind. Why? Socialism "sucks" the will to achieve from the individual....as evidenced right here in the states where almost 50% of the population have been relegated into welfare status...why work when Big Brother will provide by taking from our neighbors?
Enlighten us....why does your neighbor have any kind of responsibility toward the doless other than by a free will choice? Where's their responsibility? They are going to set on their ass and mandate that others save and store goods just for folks like them who are to damn lazy to take care of their own business/family?I won't worry.....THE STATE will take care of me.......LMAO
Do you know just how many shallow unmarked graves occurred doing the 20th century when SOCIAL JUSTICE was the rage? 94 million deaths occurred because of an ideology like the one suggested. That's some bad hat harry! Learn a little history actual....there has not been one government around the world dedicated to social justice..i.e., social communism that has not ended in revolution. To incl document governed the US (the constitution)....based upon individual freedom, capitalism, and self reliance. What? are you suggesting our government mirror a Christian Philosophy by mandate? What will happen to your Islamic terrorist friends? www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs7q_nQ_No In order to actually prompt the video presented you must manually enter the IP address....it seems our friendly neighborhood editors at YOU TUBE are at it again.
Because of your own inadequacies, you have a desperate need to feel superior to your fellow Americans. Some day soon, they will finally get fed up with your self-glorifying economic bullying and your frantic and simple-minded justifications for it. When we quit being such slavish suckers, you and your sons will pay a terrible price.
Buckly J. Ewer
Racism Whistleblower
See what I mean...
Empathy is an abstract concept to him...
He has not idea what it means ...
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Actually I pretty much was. I owned rental properties. Did most of the work myself. Sold everything off now and pretty much retired living on dividends and capital gains which are taxed very low. That makes me happy
But the employees I did have and I did have some off and on skated to make me profit. If they can't do that, they are of no use
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
How cute. Tell me what do you let your family go without so you can care for the poor?
What have you said no to your family to so you could take the money and give it to the poor. Tell me oh empathetic one.
Buckly J. Ewer
Racism Whistleblower
No concept.
Reading your moronic screed, its obvious you learned nothing. But you've got stupidly parroting leftist talking points down.
