Liberaltarianism

[Doktor Howl]

In regards to the article and premise the author proposes, I've often thought it would be easier to teach liberals about sound money

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

OH, TEACH ME, GREAT SWAMI!  I AM A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE!

not me personally, ass.

I'm no teacher.

and I wasn't aware you leaned liberal until now, but information for trolling purposes is always good information.

(note to self: troll mods very, very carfully, and make sure it's funny)

ok, all points duly noted and completely off subject.

I'm liberal in the sense that Patrick Henry and Benjamin Franklin were liberal, not in the sense that Hillary Pantsuit is "liberal".

And you can troll mods all you like.  We don't ban you for it (there's only 6 things that can get you banned).

And we're easy meat.  I, for example, just curl up in a little ball and weep like a schoolgirl.

[Thurnez Isa]

I only hold 2 non wavering political opinions
1) The government's main function is to provide protection and elevation to the lowest in the society
and 2) The government should be subjected far more stringent laws then the people

I don't know if that makes me a hippie liberal...
I do bath

[Doktor Howl]

I only hold 2 non wavering political opinions
1) The government's main function is to provide protection and elevation to the lowest in the society
and 2) The government should be subjected far more stringent laws then the people

I don't know if that makes me a hippie liberal...
I do bath

The government doesn't exist.

[East Coast Hustle]

In regards to the article and premise the author proposes, I've often thought it would be easier to teach liberals about sound money

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

OH, TEACH ME, GREAT SWAMI!  I AM A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE!

not me personally, ass.

I'm no teacher.

and I wasn't aware you leaned liberal until now, but information for trolling purposes is always good information.

(note to self: troll mods very, very carfully, and make sure it's funny)

ok, all points duly noted and completely off subject.

we don't abuse our admin powers for things as trifling as being trolled, so while you should still make it funny, we won't respond except as ordinary posters.

[East Coast Hustle]

and in case you wantto know my political position for future trolling endeavours, I follow the ideology of rational self-interest.

[Doktor Howl]

and in case you wantto know my political position for future trolling endeavours, I follow the ideology of rational self-interest.

That only leads to tears, you know.

[BabylonHoruv]

and in case you wantto know my political position for future trolling endeavours, I follow the ideology of rational self-interest.

That only leads to tears, you know.

Don't they all?

[Thurnez Isa]

I think we're just talking Idealistically Dok

you know for trolling purposes

[Doktor Howl]

I think we're just talking Idealistically Dok

you know for trolling purposes

Leave the fucking porpoises alone.  They have enough trouble with tuna nets.  They don't need a bunch of librarians picking on them, too.

[Disco Pickle]

Yes but in anything even remotely resembling a libertarian system there wouldn't be a reserve requirement at all.

this is wrong.

it would actually be a more secure banking system as you can't lend out money you don't have, or have a central bank entering numbers into a ledger to create money.

Yes, because there was never a crash before the federal reserve was formed, right?

touche'

I have no argument on this point.  I'll do more research.

I had read about reserve requirements in history somewhere.

I realize this is off the original topic and will gladly move this to a new thread if Mods think it's a good idea.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/0693lead.pdf

fact is, fractional reserve banking or no reserve banking was always the culprit in bank runs.  This is all dry shit and I wouldn't blame anyone for not wanting to read it, but page 572 is revealing about the first state run banks in this country.  

Does full reserve banking jive with the libertarian ideal of ability to create wealth for EVERYONE..  data seems to show no, not immediately.  Resources are limited, capital that can be used as collateral against lending can be much harder to acquire for the average person..

building real wealth with borrowing against other people's capital has all sorts of pitfalls and failures that can lead to societal poverty, crime...

I'd love to hear anyone else's ideas of a better run economic system.  

I've just recently rejoined the internet-as-a-way-to-learn-new-things thing, as I was away for awhile tending to other things.  

please, share away.

[East Coast Hustle]

and in case you wantto know my political position for future trolling endeavours, I follow the ideology of rational self-interest.

That only leads to tears, you know.

like hell. it's a fancy way of saying that I vote for my poker buddies in town elections.

[Disco Pickle]

and in case you wantto know my political position for future trolling endeavours, I follow the ideology of rational self-interest.

I lean that way.  as long as there's something to lean on.

for the record, I'm adamantly against trolling boards I actually like..

unless it's funny.  

sacrafices must be made for comedy.

[Kai]

I think we're just talking Idealistically Dok

you know for trolling purposes

Leave the fucking porpoises alone.  They have enough trouble with tuna nets.  They don't need a bunch of librarians picking on them, too.

11/12ths of them deserved it.

[Adios]

In regards to the article and premise the author proposes, I've often thought it would be easier to teach liberals about sound money than it would be to get Religious Rights to change their holy war kick with the middle east.  But that doesn't excuse the glaring differences libertarians have with liberals with regard to taxes, social justice (whatever that's supposed to be), political correctness, foreign policy, etc.

and really the democrats haven't had much of a public movement, with differences in minor policy beliefs being put aside in order to put forth a cohesive agenda that people can understand, for decades.   

I agree with her that libertarians really are politically homeless, but in the absence of a viable third party at least the tea party (parts of it) are TALKING fiscal responsibility, even if it's 10 years too late.

that being said, I refuse to associate with the large number of the mouth breathers in the movement, and find it nearly impossible to defend it as a whole seeing as what it's morphed into after being hijacked by Beck, Palin, et al.  The ones I met back before the election were mostly Paul Tards, who generally I agreed with on the war and deficits..  now?   

Making libertarianism centrist, or populist would be a great aspiration for those of us who are libertarian.  And for you detractors, that doesn't mean you have to be a raving Rand head to appreciate the more workable and logical libertard ideas, like opposition the drug war and building military bases on angry religious people's land. 

I'm sure I'll probably still get shit for this though..  I'm beginning to get a feel for this board. 

just so we're clear, doesn't mean I don't still like it here.  I'm staying fuckers. 

You'll do. But we will use you as a football.

[Disco Pickle]

In regards to the article and premise the author proposes, I've often thought it would be easier to teach liberals about sound money than it would be to get Religious Rights to change their holy war kick with the middle east.  But that doesn't excuse the glaring differences libertarians have with liberals with regard to taxes, social justice (whatever that's supposed to be), political correctness, foreign policy, etc.

and really the democrats haven't had much of a public movement, with differences in minor policy beliefs being put aside in order to put forth a cohesive agenda that people can understand, for decades.   

I agree with her that libertarians really are politically homeless, but in the absence of a viable third party at least the tea party (parts of it) are TALKING fiscal responsibility, even if it's 10 years too late.

that being said, I refuse to associate with the large number of the mouth breathers in the movement, and find it nearly impossible to defend it as a whole seeing as what it's morphed into after being hijacked by Beck, Palin, et al.  The ones I met back before the election were mostly Paul Tards, who generally I agreed with on the war and deficits..  now?   

Making libertarianism centrist, or populist would be a great aspiration for those of us who are libertarian.  And for you detractors, that doesn't mean you have to be a raving Rand head to appreciate the more workable and logical libertard ideas, like opposition the drug war and building military bases on angry religious people's land. 

I'm sure I'll probably still get shit for this though..  I'm beginning to get a feel for this board. 

just so we're clear, doesn't mean I don't still like it here.  I'm staying fuckers. 

You'll do. But we will use you as a football.

Where's Lucy when you need her?