On May 14, 11:23 pm, orangata...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On 15 May, 05:09, Vide...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On May 14, 8:48 pm, "John Galt" <whoisjohng...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > "Harold Burton" <hal.i.bur...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> > >news:hal.i.burton-B2640D.21395514052008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > > In article
> > > >
<88ec7336-1eba-4980-9600-28c2a4d6e...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> > > > Bret Cahill <BretCah...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > >> Friedman was an issue dodger just like all the remaining ****lls
at GOP
> > > >> "thank" tanks like Hoover, Heritage, Am. Enterprise, the Chicago
> > > >> School, etc.
>
> > > >> Friedman would never address the land issues raised by the
Georgists
> > > >> and he'ld never touch the "free markets w/o free speech" issue
either.
>
> > > >> When you dodge issues that are fundamental to your field you are
a
> > > >> fraud.
>
> > > > Care for some cheese with that whine?
>
> > > > Yeah, and let us know when you win a Nobel Prize.
>
> > > It's also a classic straw man. "I'll decide what issues should be
> > > fundamental to 'your field', so I can criticize you when you don't
address
> > > them."
>
> > > > Love the sound of leftards whining.
>
> > > Well, there are plenty (a substantive majority, even) who are free
marketers
> > > and have no quarrel with Friedman. The head of Obama's economic team
is from
> > > U of Chicago.
>
> > > That said, there are indeed those who exist on the political fringe
that
> > > have no idea how intertwined human behavior is with economic needs,
and are
> > > thus doomed to criticze men like Friedman ad infinitum (and for the
rest of
> > > us, ad nauseum) based on some Cliff Notes they read about him on
some fringe
> > > socialist/communist/anarchist site.
>
> > > JG
>
> > he never had one success. but, he had lots of disasters. of course,
> > you are a chanter, reality is not one of your stronger suits:)
>
> > There is a great deal of psychological comfort to be found in a fully
> > fledged ideology such as laissez faire because it removes the need
> > for
> > critical thought. The ideology is used as an algorithm. All the
> > individual has to do in any situation is to ask what the ideology
> > requires by way of action. The fact that the action may be harmful or
> > the ideology objectively at odds with reality is emotionally
> > unim****tant for the individual. What matters is that an answer has
> > been
> > found which is compatible with the ideology. This is especially
> > appealing to the less intellectually curious.
>
> > Psychologically, political ideologies are akin to religion and their
> > practitioners behave in an essentially religious manner. For example,
> > in the case of laissez faire, its disciples chant "let the market
> > decide" in the manner of Christians saying "God will provide."
>
> > Those amongst the elite who are not true believers in laissez faire
> > will, in most cases, toe the ideological line because they deem it
> > prudent to do so for their own careers and security. The few who
> > speak
> > out against it are simply sidelined.
> > ROBERT HENDERSON- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Instead of attacking Dr Friedman's reputation why not share your
> vision of a successful economy?
i have many times over the years on the usenet. his reputation was a
facade and artificial, it needs attacking. he was a monster at heart.
|
