| Welcome to Round Table Knights Clan. Enjoy your visit! |
| So I was thinking | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 11 2011, 01:09 AM (1,601 Views) | |
| Cole Stark of WinterFell | Jun 26 2011, 05:44 PM Post #71 |
|
Retired Knight's Apprentice
|
We all should eat cake
|
![]() |
|
| Dagonet of Rus | Jun 26 2011, 06:28 PM Post #72 |
![]()
Retired Knight of the Round Table
|
Well now that's quite another thing altogether, in the UK atleast it's impossible to starve to death or even into malnourishment unless one wants to, has been abducted or being deliberately mistreated by legal guardian or agents thereof. Not that this can be said of people of every nation, thanks in large part to the 'developed' nations' belief that the ability to manipulate currencies confers a right to a better existence than those elsewhere. |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 26 2011, 08:02 PM Post #73 |
|
Master of Spam
|
Well if you want to put it that way, financing your tax cuts from deficit is actually somewhat similar to a deficit stimulus a la Keynes. However, government spending stays in your country easier than disposable income. But the point here was that Reagan's government actually *spent* a lot from deficit, and that's got a lot more to do with Keynes than with supply side "voodoo economics"
|
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 27 2011, 03:52 AM Post #74 |
|
Calm yourself Dagn00bius! With his comments on President Reagan, Din is merely doing his best to entertain us with his comedic take on political punditry...
|
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 27 2011, 06:42 AM Post #75 |
|
Master of Spam
|
LOL, here comes the same pathetic mockery as every time Chazz faces facts that aren't in line with the misconceptions he parroted Debate skillz fail.
|
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 27 2011, 06:48 AM Post #76 |
|
Why the insult Din? Galahad and myself really do find your comments in this thread on Reagan to be quite funny. Bravo...
|
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 27 2011, 07:54 AM Post #77 |
|
Master of Spam
|
...and he goes on and on and on... Duracell? |
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 27 2011, 09:47 AM Post #78 |
|
Din keep your chin up m8. You're doing a very fine job of entertaining the conservatives here. The fantasy story you're spinning about President Reagan has us all chuckling & smiling.
|
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 27 2011, 10:35 AM Post #79 |
|
Master of Spam
|
I was wrong. Energizer. |
![]() |
|
| Kay of Sauvage | Jun 28 2011, 02:52 AM Post #80 |
|
Retired Knight
|
Ah, the legend of President Reagan. Did you guys learn about that at Fox News University? Because that seems to be about the extent of what you know about it. It's the same old simplistic myth. You know, we were actually getting beyond simplistic broad-based accounts of history in the Election 2010 thread, where we were discussing the root economic logic that underpins these broader beliefs. But you guys seemed to have bailed on that discussion. I know the conservative arguments. But I don't know how they could possibly be used to refute what I've said there so far, assuming you are trying to answer the points honestly. I think the only thing you have left is to avoid the arguments. It sure would be nice if you could perhaps either agree with the logic, or disagree specifying why. Or at least agree with the logic but state why it doesn't matter, so at least we can move on with some basic fundamentals agreed upon, and then build on that. |
![]() |
|
| Pete of Yorkshire | Jun 28 2011, 04:20 PM Post #81 |
|
Knight
|
* remeber's earlier post about being more diplomatic* * trying to resist responce* oh well...... is see chazz is back to using his old tricks of putting people down to win debates even after he's got his arse handed to him by someone who is more intelligent than him and also not from the country your talking about wait arn't you american chazz?. ( im not saying im more intelligant than chazz btw i just have better things to remeber rather than political bollocks that doesn't even concern me i have more important stuff to remeber like remebering how to fix a 3 phase invertor but you know....wait im rambling) back to the point Din 1 Chazz 0. |
![]() |
|
| Pete of Yorkshire | Jun 28 2011, 04:32 PM Post #82 |
|
Knight
|
i love you dag. |
![]() |
|
| Elrich of Gaul | Jun 28 2011, 05:01 PM Post #83 |
|
Former Knight and Honored King of Old
|
Awkward.....
|
![]() |
|
| Dagonet of Rus | Jun 28 2011, 10:02 PM Post #84 |
![]()
Retired Knight of the Round Table
|
There's no way 2 Chazz' would fit in my errrm. self-pleasuring device. My momma once said, "I only beat you cause I love you." That's the relationship I see blossoming between Din & Chazz, no awkwardness, just emotionally stunted lovin'
|
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 28 2011, 10:21 PM Post #85 |
|
:lol: |
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 28 2011, 10:51 PM Post #86 |
|
You'd just as well make the argument that Jesus was an extremely violent man because he threw the merchants out of the synagogue as this one about Reagan. Not a serious argument at all here... |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 28 2011, 11:42 PM Post #87 |
|
Master of Spam
|
What's not serious? FED policy facts? Reagan spending facts? Get real Chazzy, it's historical data. That recession ended with a period of monetary easing (FED) and increased spending, from deficit (Reagan). And what's the religion card doing here?
|
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 29 2011, 12:26 AM Post #88 |
|
At best the argument you're making is quite weak and illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding of post Carter America and the challenges that it faced. Like I said you might as well try and make the case Jesus was inherently violent because he threw the merchants out of the synagogue... |
![]() |
|
| Pete of Yorkshire | Jun 29 2011, 01:40 AM Post #89 |
|
Knight
|
awwww isn't chazz entertaing us with his wild fantasy's....... |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 29 2011, 10:27 AM Post #90 |
|
Master of Spam
|
Why don't you disprove something then. Or are even weak arguments too strong for you? BTW, put away your Bible while you're at it - it offers little of use for modern economics.
|
![]() |
|
| Elrich of Gaul | Jun 29 2011, 11:41 AM Post #91 |
|
Former Knight and Honored King of Old
|
Actually.... it does stress to only take what you need... had everyone listened to that philosophy.... there wouldn't be record amounts of household debt.. just sayin'..... :rolleyes: ok, I'm done...
|
![]() |
|
| Dagonet of Rus | Jun 29 2011, 07:38 PM Post #92 |
![]()
Retired Knight of the Round Table
|
Though I can't think of any civilisation that dragged itself out of the stone age using such a philosophy. |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 29 2011, 08:30 PM Post #93 |
|
Master of Spam
|
Hmm, that one got me thinking, interesting sidetrack. I didn't remember any part where this is directly "stressed" in the Bible except something vaguely similar in the way the Jews divided manna. It could perhaps be derived from the meny calls for charity and hospitality in the Gospels. Where do you think the Bible stresses this? ((Ofc, there's what Dag said, plus modern economics are all about getting richer anyway, so certainly this would either conflict with the basic principle, or you would be redefining "need" all the time, and hence lose the conclusion about not making "unneeded" purchases from debt.)) |
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 29 2011, 09:33 PM Post #94 |
|
That's an excellent point E.
|
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 30 2011, 12:30 AM Post #95 |
|
Sorry Din but I don't care to have a discussion proving the sky is blue. Much more fun to discuss novels and FPS's like BF3. Interesting to note that during the Reagan administration he also faced a similar though smaller in scope financial crisis brought on by the deregulation of the S&L's during the Carter administration. Here are some of Carter's thoughts on the passage of the Depository Institutions Deregulation And Monetary Control Act:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.ph...6#axzz1QiJ92tD8 Nearly universal deregualtion under Jimmy Carter? What an amazing conservative he must have been! So many misturns and incredibly bad policy under Carter. Obama seems to have picked up his mantle. ![]() In your search for truth, here is a great article to help clear up some of your misconceptions about the Reagan tax cuts. It combines real time analysis of the general debate on the bill at the time. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/1...tic+Alternative God speed on your quest for truth my Hungarian amigo!!!
|
![]() |
|
| tehReal~ChaZZZy | Jun 30 2011, 01:04 AM Post #96 |
|
Here's a part of one of his addresses from a President Reagan State of the Union speech.
You can go online and hear many of the same general thoughts on similar subject matter once he turned from the dark side of liberalism. Smaller government and empowering the individual are some of general core ideas that fueled Reagan policy.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/05/05/mornin...-of-federalism/ |
![]() |
|
| Mercurius of Cappadocia | Jun 30 2011, 08:50 AM Post #97 |
|
King of the Round Table Knights
|
Heritage Foundation is not a credible source. |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 30 2011, 10:51 AM Post #98 |
|
Master of Spam
|
Clearly... you prefer to post that the sky's orange, and we should take your word for it. What did you mean to say with that Carter part? That deregulation is bad? That deregulation is good? That you hate Carter? That you hate Obama? What am I supposed to do with a 1981 analysis of what Reagan *may* do? We have historical data about what he *did* do... and the same about the Fed. What is your ideal of federalism? That the states make budget surpluses and transfer ~$50 billion in 1984 dollars to the federal government that's running three-four times the deficit without it?
|
![]() |
|
| Elrich of Gaul | Jun 30 2011, 10:55 AM Post #99 |
|
Former Knight and Honored King of Old
|
Well.. stone age is a little drastic but.... consider where we came from and where we are now.. Are we really any better off today than we were back in the simple life.?? I mean... minus the Ipods and stuff.... Before we drag ourselves out of something.. we best be well aware of what it is we're heading towards.. Back in the day... you would actually remove your hat and address a lady... today.. ppfftt.. really.? Makes you wonder if we're really moving forward or backwards... |
![]() |
|
| Elrich of Gaul | Jun 30 2011, 11:11 AM Post #100 |
|
Former Knight and Honored King of Old
|
Proverbs 25:16 Hast thou found honey? eat so much as is sufficient for thee, lest thou be filled therewith, and vomit it. 25:27 It is not good to eat much honey: so for men to search their own glory is not glory. Philippians 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand. These are just a few places where the topic of "moderation" is discussed. But the point I think is not how many times it discusses to take only what is needed or moderation.. but how if these basic principles had been adhered to, there wouldn't be an enormous individual household debt per average household. Greed is a terrible thang..... |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 30 2011, 12:05 PM Post #101 |
|
Master of Spam
|
Yes, we really are. Unless the religion you follow prescribes suffering in this life. :ninja:
Yes, but not in the "simple life" days ![]() You'd rather buy a lady for three sheep. -- I did a search in English-language Bibles before I asked you, and I really don't think the honey proverb (which I had found) is a call for sticking to your needs. You don't need honey in the first place, and it was a bit of luxury for most in the time... not to mention its slightly obscure use as a metaphor. "Moderation" is of course a less strict approach and does occur in the New Testament often enough. Then again, how to apply this in modern life? Do you or don't you "need" a house, a car, a computer?
|
![]() |
|
| Elrich of Gaul | Jun 30 2011, 12:24 PM Post #102 |
|
Former Knight and Honored King of Old
|
I guess I should be more specific when I say "are we better in this era than before"... Yes, I agree with you when it comes to suffering.. if we're talking about health care and such... but I was speaking as a people and how we regard eath other and treat each other... lol. .for the lady bit.. .you know what I mean... the overall respect people had for each other... it's gone the way of the horse and buggy... When I speak of "moderation".. I'm referring to today's "X and Y" generation and the predicament they've put themselves into with the example of the recent housing/bank/ecomony crash in the US. People are being offered huge amounts of credit and told that "yes", you are pre-approved".... they go out and not only buy a house.. .they buy a house that is way above not only what they need.... but what they can barely afford... and they become what is commonly known as "house poor". They then struggle as a couple to pay everything off (barely) until one either looses a job, interest rates go up or something happens.. then they loose it all.. why..??? do they need a home.? sure, of course they need shelter, but does it have to be 2500 square feet, with inground pool and triple car garage.? Back in our grandparents day, when they started off, they started off at the first rung of the ladder. Gradually, through life, as they could afford it, they would climb up the rungs one by one until they got as high as they aspired to. Should something have gone wrong during this "climb"... they'd fall back one rung. Today, the X and Y genners want to start at the "top" rung, or as near to it as possible. They want it all and they want it now.!! The banks were just giving it to them in the form of mortgages and credit limits... until.... My point is "moderation"... need a house, yes, buy one that you can not only afford but one that meets your needs.. need transportation.. yes, buy one that you can not only afford but meets your needs.. Yes, that X5 looks pretty good and the bank says you can have it.. but do you really.? Yes, your neighbor has the 55" LED hot off the market TV.. but do you need to go out and buy the 60"..?? This is what I'm saying... if we'd all stuck to the basics and used/bought/loaned in moderation and only to meet our needs, a lot of bail out money, heartbreaks and pains would have easily been avoided. p.s. the honey isnt to be taken literally.. just to show that "too much of a good thing isn't necessarily a good thing"... But I am glad however that we are exchanging ideals and views on not only different planes, but in different parts of the world as well. Too many people are solidly etched in their own ideals or their country's position that they go and stick their noses in other peeps business creating strife everywhere... |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 30 2011, 01:52 PM Post #103 |
|
Master of Spam
|
That's a dark picture. Politeness and prudence is not completely lost :lol: Perceived affordability was what tricked people into taking out loans. What someone deems luxury may be just a bit of extra comfort for others and trivial for yet another group. Where's the line? I bathe in heated drinking water. It's available, cheap and pleasant. For me.
|
![]() |
|
| Elrich of Gaul | Jun 30 2011, 02:04 PM Post #104 |
|
Former Knight and Honored King of Old
|
I'll agree with your statement for sure.... but on the other side.... are people that gullable to believe what others are telling them they have in their own bank accounts.??? Rather than study their own financial stability, what they can or cannot afford, people are letting other "snake charmers" tell them what they can or cannot do. The worst part of all that.... most of these people led into this trap.. are actually educated... but were blinded so easily.... and by what do you think.? greed.? Wow.. I bathe in the same type of water.. who'd have thunk? |
![]() |
|
| Dinadan of Logris | Jun 30 2011, 03:17 PM Post #105 |
|
Master of Spam
|
"Business as usual" assumptions will kill even honest calculations when things stop going as usual. It could be called "greed", but then that's giving a negative connotation to the strive for more, for better. There's an undefined line again. Of course, when it's just about swindling money out of a foolish lender, then I'll gladly call it "greed", on both sides
Exactly. Yet, do we really "need" to bathe in heated drinking water? No. Would that be luxury to many? Yes.
|
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Portcullis · Next Topic » |








2:36 PM Jul 11