[Judicial Watch] Isis camp in Mexico close to Texas border

So slavery as an issue is just "identiy politics" and I assume "politcial correctness"

Nice!!

 

And the current Republican Party can claim him if they ignore the evolution of the political parties over the last 150 years. What's next, are you going to tell us Jefferson Davis was a raging liberal?

 

Criticizing ISIS is Islamophobic amirite

 

"This is really dumb"? Okay... You have any refutations to my notions, the same notions held by some very respected political scientists and philosophers?

 

Well, he did prefer Europe to the U.S.

 

WUT? Strawman much?

 

Yeah, free markets have been good for all, no matter how many philosophers without an economics degree complain. Milton Friedman's ideas won for good reason

 

A perfect way to exemplify evolution of the two parties is the demographics the two parties pandered to in their respective era. It essentially swapped. The conservative south is pandered by the Republican party today. It was the total opposite in the time of Lincoln.

 

http://www.valleycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=1192437#.VTE3c5Pwq64

 

Empirically, the 'free market' increased class divisions across the globe. Wealth more than ever in the entire history of the human race has never been more concentrated into a small percentage of the population.

 

Really? The world has never been less unequal. The dramatic reduction in poverty in places like China thanks to open markets has made more people better off than ever.

Now, there are more extreme rich people as well. If you invent Facebook or the iPhone, you're going to be incredibly rich. How this is a bad thing though, is something that has never been explained.

How are redistributinist countries like France and Greece doing compared to pro growth countries like the US and Germany?

 

My apologies Booey... But I will say that all of the cartels down there aren't buddy buddy and there are possibly some cartels who are upset with the US for their involvement in drug wars helping other cartels come to power. So they could possibly find some assistance if they were actually there.

What does that have to do with anything. It seems to me the poster was speaking of the confederate states which Lincoln had no control of.

 

Capitalism is a two edged sword. While China is certainly wealthier it is definitely more unequal. One could argue that it is a good tradeoff compared to when nearly everyone was destitute during Mao, but if you look at China now the average peasant is a better now but when compared to the urban wealthy the peasants aren't much better off than when Mao was in charge.

Capitalism has been a smashing success compared to agrarian feudalism and it has been very successful when compared to trying to implement communism on a large scale, such as in the PRC and USSR. As far as equality though I don't think that case can be made. The inequalities in wealth during the robber baron period and now between the 1% and the rest are starting to rival what was seen in dynastic China.

You do realize that when it comes to social welfare policies that Germany is a lot closer to France that it is to the US.

 

A Texas Tech Economics degree at work, ladies & gents.

Enjoy the show.

You are the hero this thread deserves.

 

Says the guy who doesn't know what supply side is.

Your judgment in all areas is questionable when you say Kawhi Leonard is a mediocre player

 

Of course I know what it is - it's the side you are serving when you put on your brown UPS shorts every morning and come ring my doorbell.

#gunsup

 

Then define it. I'll be waiting

 

"if you look at China now the average peasant is a better now but when compared to the urban wealthy the peasants aren't much better off than when Mao was in charge"

What do you mean? In an absolute sense they are much better off. Relatively it's hard to say, but why does it matter when they are better off in an absolute sense?

German labor market reforms made them much closer to us in that area. In which area is France closer?

 

Having spent time in rural China and heard from peasants first hand they are better off in terms of that no one is starving like they were under the Great Leap Forward. Technological improvements have helped but also many peasant families incomes are greatly supplemented by money from family members who have gone to work in cities. That said the average lifestyle for a rural Chinese person hasn't vastly improved from what it was in the 1960's. It's not unusual to see people still using donkeys to haul coal to heat their homes or working plots of land by hand like they did decades ago.

As far as the disparities in wealth if you compare the uber rich of China to the peasants it is up to levels that rival the dynastic imperial families to peasants then.

Don't get me wrong I think Capitalism is and was necessary for the overall advancement from feudal agrarian economies that dominated the world two centuries ago to industrial and now information age economies. That said Captitalism isn't an end all to itself. There are many problems with Capitalism and inequality is one of them. To put too much faith in Capitalism and the invisible hand is about as dangerous as to put too much faith in Communism and collective interests.

Germany's welfare state is much closer to France in that they have much more public health care and other services. Germans also work less and get more vacation than most Americans. In fact according to some studies they work less than the French do.
http://www.businessinsider.com/aver...for-americans-vs-the-rest-of-the-world-2013-8


[rquoter]Now what about the famously hard-working Germans.

Turns out, they basically went the French route. Actually, these days, the Germans (green line) work even fewer hours per year than the French do! Like the French, they used to work more hours than the Americans, but then jumped on the vacation bandwagon.[/rquoter]

 

You will be waiting, for my signature.

#gunsup