orangatang1@[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?
It's im****tant to understand the history of the Chicago School and the
Austrian School. It all traces back to the reaction of the international
bankers to Lincoln's Greenback monetary experiment during the civil war.
It took a few years, but the bankers managed to construct a comprehensive
PR campaign that took in hiring and firing of college professors, buying
newspapers, influencing the newspapers they didn't own, distributing
pamphlets, and of course purchasing politicians. The bankers set up their
own Monetary Commission outside of government, which wrote the Gold
Standard Act of 1900.
They didn't stop there. The bankers and their hirelings kept pu****ng and
produced the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. Their organized efforts have
continued to this day. They fund and control both conservative and
liberal
groups. To them ideology is just a tool. There are true believers in
libertarianism but they are tools of the money masters. There are liberal
non profit foundation people who believe in what they are doing and don't
know they are tools of the money masters. Both political parties are the
property of the bankers.
There is a huge intellectual prostitute class that was created back in the
late 1800's that operates on the free market principal. Instead of
waiting
to be hired by wealthy owners, they start up think tanks on their own.
They identify what issues will benefit the wealthy at the expense of
working people. They create a propaganda organization to promote these
goals and then market the think tank to the rich by requesting donations.
The wealthy don't have to bother personally looking into which political
issues to fund any more than they have to personally learn how to handle
their tax returns.
Mark M.
|
