OT Big Science is broken

[dviss1]

Ayn Rand was not an anarchist. It's hard to deal with posts like yours, misinformation.

Same for the well shtick. Libertarians have no issue helping others. Just government FORCing anyone to do something other than not committing crimes is bad policy.

Unfortunately for you, authoritarian government has been tried, and it sucks and in most cases is evil.

Ayn Rand was also on the government take she's a hypocrite anyway.

 

[Denny Crane]

Why do you want to decrease the power of elected government and increase the power of unelected rich people?

Government is bigger than 350M people and all the businesses combined. No rich person or company can control EVERYTHING, make laws, etc.

 

[Denny Crane]

Um No.... You're absolutely incorrect about that.

I'm absolutely correct about that.

I already schooled you once.

drops mic

 

[dviss1]

I'm absolutely correct about that.

I already schooled you once.

drops mic

Libertarians don't give a shit about any body besides themselves. You Denny may be the lone outlier.

 

[Denny Crane]

Libertarians don't give a shit about any body besides themselves. You Denny may be the lone outlier.

I am TYPICAL of Libertarians.

10th amendment:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The Constitution was quite precise about what powers were delegated to the United States and those were few, SMALL government, and how to amend it to handle situations where new technology (or whatever) needs to be dealt with.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3:

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse [sic] three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

Article 1, Section 9

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

Before the 16th amendment, 1913, the federal government could not tax the citizens directly. No income tax, no sales tax, no nothing. The feds could tax the states and the states had to pay the tax, but not the people directly. It was meant to be only enough to pay for the military and post office and the things ENUMERATED in the constitution. It was even questionable that we should have a standing army at all.

That's what this country operated under (Libertarianism) until 1913. How you can possibly think the way things are always was the way things were is amusing at best.

 

[Denny Crane]

Libertarian Party proposals encourage charity.

https://www.lp.org/issues/poverty-and-welfare

1. End Welfare
2. For every dollar you donate to a charity, you get a dollar of tax credit
3. Get government out of the way of job creation and growth
4. Reform education: free market and FULL choice for parents and kids to choose the school they go to.

 

[jlprk]

So the top 1%'s charity will replace Social Security, health insurance, public parks, the space program, regulations protecting our food, you name it.

Oh yeah, that won't reduce the bottom 99% to serfdom. Like Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, you want to move civilization backward 500 years. Rich conservatives have propagandized against every revolution since, while Democrats or their equivalent parties have produced all advances.

 

[Denny Crane]

So the top 1%'s charity will replace Social Security, health insurance, public parks, the space program, regulations protecting our food, you name it.

Oh yeah, that won't reduce the bottom 99% to serfdom. Like Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, you want to move civilization backward 500 years. Rich conservatives have propagandized against every revolution since, while Democrats or their equivalent parties have produced all advances.

Advances. That's good for a laugh.

Ponzi schemes, not enough money for all these advances, "retirement" in poverty, destruction of public education, incarceration rates that are an outright embarrassment, and the list goes on and on. Sadly, when all this has been proven failures and the doubling and tripling down on these failed policies, you'll get us into a war to end all wars to kick capitalism back into gear.

You claim to be an accountant, good at numbers.

How many $50-billionaires are there? If we confiscated 100% of their wealth, and all the millionaires and on up, how much of Obama's debt would it pay down? Better yet, what fraction of a year's federal budget would it cover? You are Don Quixote, tilting at windmills.

You act like your list of massive expenses at the cost of millions' well being is a good thing. It ain't.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'll do part of your homework for you.

These are all there are in the world. China has more $billionaires than the USA, so maybe you get 1/2 of the dollar figure from Americans.

So you've already spent 3x their net worth in less than a decade. Once you've stolen everything from them, you're really close to broke. Insolvent as you accounts put it.

 

[Denny Crane]

The graphic above is deceiving. The Koch brothers amassed $68B in a lifetime. Cuba's GDP is the value of all the goods and services produced by Cuba in a year.

Progressive Obama has taken your allowance. Government should tax a percentage of GDP and Progressive economics has killed 1/3 of our GDP growth. Smaller allowance in the future. The interest on the debt buys the Cadillac of space programs, and plenty of money left over. PER YEAR.

How he and Progressive theory have hastened our demise will be obvious if interest rates rise only modestly, still remaining below historical norms. After paying the Ponzi scheme recipients their poverty level incomes and the interest on the debt, there won't be any money for space programs or public parks. Or even a modest defense.

Anyhow, good luck spending that $768. That kind of money will vastly improve everyone's standard of living. $768 might buy a decent TV. Good luck if it breaks.

 

[jlprk]

Libertarian Party proposals encourage charity.
https://www.lp.org/issues/poverty-and-welfare

1. End Welfare
2. For every dollar you donate to a charity, you get a dollar of tax credit
3. Get government out of the way of job creation and growth
4. Reform education: free market and FULL choice for parents and kids to choose the school they go to.

So charity from the rich will replace the Ponzi scheme that is government. At the end of the work day, if I want to go to a park, I'll beg the boss to build a park.

The only thing Libertarianism has going for it is its catchy name.

 

[Denny Crane]

So charity from the rich will replace the Ponzi scheme that is government. At the end of the work day, if I want to go to a park, I'll beg the boss to build a park.

The only thing Libertarianism has going for it is its catchy name.

You act like people did a whole lot worse before the Ponzi scheme. Or that there were no parks.

Social Security is the Ponzi Scheme. The rest of government is just a drag on hundreds of millions of people's well being.

In spite of $4 trillion of government money to spend, I see a couple dozen homeless people every day. Not the same ones. Just on the street, or begging for money at stoplights. Multiply that by 50,000+ cities and towns.

Bernie Sanders was interviewed by the New York Daily News editorial board. Faced with reasonable questions, he came out looking like the clown he is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...about-but-didnt-in-that-daily-news-interview/

Nine moments in the Sanders conversation left me agape. From his own plans for breaking up too-big-to-fail banks to how he would handle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to dealing with the Islamic State, the man giving homegirl Hillary Clinton a run for her money seemed surprisingly out of his depth.

Daily News: Okay. But do you have a sense that there is a particular statute or statutes that a prosecutor could have or should have invoked to bring indictments?

Sanders: I suspect that there are. Yes.

Daily News: You believe that? But do you know?

Sanders: I believe that that is the case. Do I have them in front of me, now, legal statutes? No, I don’t. But if I would…yeah, that’s what I believe, yes. When a company pays a $5 billion fine for doing something that’s illegal, yeah, I think we can bring charges against the executives.

Daily News: I’m only pressing because you’ve made it such a central part of your campaign. And I wanted to know what the mechanism would be to accomplish it.

OMG

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...retty-close-to-a-disaster-for-bernie-sanders/

This New York Daily News interview was pretty close to a disaster for Bernie Sanders

Daily News: So if you look forward, a year, maybe two years, right now you have ... JPMorgan has 241,000 employees. About 20,000 of them in New York. $192 billion in net assets. What happens? What do you foresee? What is JPMorgan in year two of ...

Sanders: What I foresee is a stronger national economy. And, in fact, a stronger economy in New York State, as well. What I foresee is a financial system which actually makes affordable loans to small and medium-size businesses. Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits. And, in fact, creating incredibly complicated financial tools, which have led us into the worst economic recession in the modern history of the United States.

Daily News: I get that point. I’m just looking at the method because, actions have reactions, right? There are pluses and minuses. So, if you push here, you may get an unintended consequence that you don’t understand. So, what I’m asking is, how can we understand? If you look at JPMorgan just as an example, or you can do Citibank, or Bank of America. What would it be? What would that institution be? Would there be a consumer bank? Where would the investing go?

Sanders: I’m not running JPMorgan Chase or Citibank.

ADVANCES.

Yeah, right. I see 241,000 newly unemployed from just the one bank.

 

[jlprk]

After the New York Daily Clinton Wall Street News did a typical editorial board interview, then persecuted Sanders in their paper for giving typical answers, I read the whole transcript. I found nothing out of the ordinary. His answers were just fine.

Every candidate says that while laws may not be in place to achieve goals, he will try to get them passed. Or, he says that the law already exists, but is not being vigorously enforced. Sanders answered that Obama's Attorney General could have pursued Wall Street after the Bush debacle, but didn't, and that a Sanders Attorney General would be tougher on them. But the Clinton Wall Street Daily News wanted him to answer with the exact statute and code section.

Bernie did just fine in that interview. Not that it has anything to do with either science or Libertarianism.

 

[MarAzul]

Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits.

Interesting idea! A company not for profit. Wonder how it attracts investors?

 

[Denny Crane]

After the New York Daily Clinton Wall Street News did a typical editorial board interview, then persecuted Sanders in their paper for giving typical answers, I read the whole transcript. I found nothing out of the ordinary. His answers were just fine.

Every candidate says that while laws may not be in place to achieve goals, he will try to get them passed. Or, he says that the law already exists, but is not being vigorously enforced. Sanders answered that Obama's Attorney General could have pursued Wall Street after the Bush debacle, but didn't, and that a Sanders Attorney General would be tougher on them. But the Clinton Wall Street Daily News wanted him to answer with the exact statute and code section.

Bernie did just fine in that interview. Not that it has anything to do with either science or Libertarianism.

They asked him some not so hard questions that he couldn't answer about things he promises in his stump speeches. Then they published the whole transcript. What a terrible way to do journalism?

You can't pass a law and then indict someone for past crimes. It's an ex post facto law and forbidden by the constitution. That pesky piece of toilet paper to you guys.

LOL

 

[jlprk]

This New York Daily News interview was pretty close to a disaster for Bernie Sanders

Daily News: So if you look forward, a year, maybe two years, right now you have ... JPMorgan has 241,000 employees. About 20,000 of them in New York. $192 billion in net assets. What happens? What do you foresee? What is JPMorgan in year two of ...

Sanders: What I foresee is a stronger national economy. And, in fact, a stronger economy in New York State, as well. What I foresee is a financial system which actually makes affordable loans to small and medium-size businesses. Does not live as an island onto themselves concerned about their own profits. And, in fact, creating incredibly complicated financial tools, which have led us into the worst economic recession in the modern history of the United States.

Daily News: I get that point. I’m just looking at the method because, actions have reactions, right? There are pluses and minuses. So, if you push here, you may get an unintended consequence that you don’t understand. So, what I’m asking is, how can we understand? If you look at JPMorgan just as an example, or you can do Citibank, or Bank of America. What would it be? What would that institution be? Would there be a consumer bank? Where would the investing go?

Sanders: I’m not running JPMorgan Chase or Citibank.

ADVANCES.

Yeah, right. I see 241,000 newly unemployed from just the one bank.

They ask him, how will the giant banks change their organization charts to please you. He answers, it's none of my business. I don't run the companies. So the paper ran headlines saying that he had no answers. If he had answered them in detail, their headlines would have said that he didn't know his place as President, that he planned to micromanage the big banks. He couldn't win either way with the stupid questions, so he declined like a pro.

 

[Denny Crane]

They ask him, how will the giant banks change their organization charts to please you. He answers, it's none of my business. I don't run the companies. So the paper ran headlines saying that he had no answers. If he had answered them in detail, their headlines would have said that he didn't know his place as President, that he planned to micromanage the big banks. He couldn't win either way with the stupid questions, so he declined like a pro.

it's his policy to break them up. He has to understand what it means for the banks if he gets his way. What a bonehead.

This is the same New York Daily News that's calling for impeachment right away if Trump is elected.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/impeach-trump-article-1.2549541

Impeach Trump

Ready?
It’s not too early to start.

 

[jlprk]

1) You act like people did a whole lot worse before the Ponzi scheme. Or that there were no parks.

Social Security is the Ponzi Scheme. The rest of government is just a drag on hundreds of millions of people's well being.

2) In spite of $4 trillion of government money to spend, I see a couple dozen homeless people every day. Not the same ones. Just on the street, or begging for money at stoplights. Multiply that by 50,000+ cities and towns.

Bernie Sanders was interviewed by the New York Daily News editorial board. Faced with reasonable questions, he came out looking like the clown he is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...about-but-didnt-in-that-daily-news-interview/

Nine moments in the Sanders conversation left me agape. From his own plans for breaking up too-big-to-fail banks to how he would handle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to dealing with the Islamic State, the man giving homegirl Hillary Clinton a run for her money seemed surprisingly out of his depth.

3) Daily News: Okay. But do you have a sense that there is a particular statute or statutes that a prosecutor could have or should have invoked to bring indictments?

Sanders: I suspect that there are. Yes.

Daily News: You believe that? But do you know?

Sanders: I believe that that is the case. Do I have them in front of me, now, legal statutes? No, I don’t. But if I would…yeah, that’s what I believe, yes. When a company pays a $5 billion fine for doing something that’s illegal, yeah, I think we can bring charges against the executives.

Daily News: I’m only pressing because you’ve made it such a central part of your campaign. And I wanted to know what the mechanism would be to accomplish it.

OMG

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/05/this-new-york-daily-news-interview-was-pretty-close-to-a-disaster-for-bernie-sanders/

1) There were no parks, just plantations for us serfs to serve you rich guys...the historical inventors of Ponzi Schemes.

2) All of us 99% will be homeless, begging for you 1% to get a charitable deduction by throwing us a bone.

3) Waaah. He didn't know the exact code section and statute. Instead, he'll sick the Attorney General on existing laws, and have Congress negotiate new laws. Is this process new to you and the Daily News?

 

[jlprk]

it's his policy to break them up. He has to understand what it means for the banks if he gets his way. What a bonehead.

Why? It's not his problem what happens to bad guys after he stops them. When they can't invent bad instruments like derivatives, they will make less money and lay off some employees. Duh...and waaah. You and the Daily News feign frightened shock over the outcome of fighting bad guys on Wall Street.

 

[Denny Crane]

1) There were no parks, just plantations for us serfs to serve you rich guys...the historical inventors of Ponzi Schemes.

2) All of us 99% will be homeless, begging for you 1% to get a charitable deduction by throwing us a bone.

3) Waaah. He didn't know the exact code section and statute. Instead, he'll sick the Attorney General on existing laws, and have Congress negotiate new laws. Is this process new to you and the Daily News?

1) There were parks. The first park in America was the Boston Common, established in 1634. How many years before FDR was that? You're the math guy.
2) I'm not 1%, not even close. I'm just not envious of those who are.
3) He's going around accusing people of committing crimes. It might be useful if he had a clue about what crimes were committed. He's clueless.

 

[jlprk]

it's his policy to break them up. He has to understand what it means for the banks if he gets his way. What a bonehead.

Coddle the criminal, coddle the criminal. You leftists can't stop your cradle-to-grave soft-hearted interference against the Mighty Will of God.

 

[jlprk]

1) There were parks. The first park in America was the Boston Common, established in 1634. How many years before FDR was that? You're the math guy.
2) I'm not 1%, not even close. I'm just not envious of those who are.
3) He's going around accusing people of committing crimes. It might be useful if he had a clue about what crimes were committed. He's clueless.

1) The Sheriff of Nottingham Park hanged Robin Hood's friends when he caught them. They hunted animals which were owned by the King and his rich friends, according to the arbitrary legal system. Those damned liberals wanted free stuff. They wanted to use someone else's money...as defined by the evil legal system.

3) As President, he plans to get his Justice Dept. to more rigorously enforce existing laws, and to get Congress to pass new laws. You ever heard of the American/European system before? Parliamentary democracy, all that stuff?

 

[oldfisherman]

I have been trying to understand how Bernie’s plan will work. He does a nice job of outlining what he wants to do, and how he will pay for it. On paper it all sounds great and reasonable. BUT.

There is much Bernie is leaving out, or, does not understand about how the economy & business works. Here is my short outline of the results to Bernie’s plan if he gets his way.


1) It will raise the % of payroll taxes everyone pays, including those making minimum wage. (minimum 2.4% payroll tax increase for individuals)

2) There will be a huge loss of jobs. Many small companies will be forced out of business; larger companies will move more jobs to other counties.

3) Not only will investments from inside our country decline, so will foreign investments. Even worse, foreign investors will demand the return of the money they have already invested in our country.

4) As investment money in USA businesses declines, so will the money to invest in city, state and federal government bonds.

5) The Companies that have not gone out of business or left for other countries will need to increase prices on their products and services to pay for Bernie’s plan.


Short answer, Bernie’s plan does not work.

 

[jlprk]

Why don't you try figuring out how Cruz' plan will work. Or how Trump's plan will work. All candidates' goals, when subjected to analysis, would cost trillions. No one expects the goals to be fully carried out. Often they are thrust forward as negotiating planks, to be whittled down in negotiations.

 

[Denny Crane]

Why? It's not his problem what happens to bad guys after he stops them. When they can't invent bad instruments like derivatives, they will make less money and lay off some employees. Duh...and waaah. You and the Daily News feign frightened shock over the outcome of fighting bad guys on Wall Street.

It is his problem, and more importantly, ours. It's going to put 241,000 people on the welfare roles as a bad side effect of his poorly thought out policy. That's more than you can afford.

 

[Denny Crane]

Coddle the criminal, coddle the criminal. You leftists can't stop your cradle-to-grave soft-hearted interference against the Mighty Will of God.

I don't coddle the criminal where there is no criminal or law that was broken.

It's gestapo to make up a crime and then accuse and convict someone of that crime after the fact.

 

[Denny Crane]

1) The Sheriff of Nottingham Park hanged Robin Hood's friends when he caught them. They hunted animals which were owned by the King and his rich friends, according to the arbitrary legal system. Those damned liberals wanted free stuff. They wanted to use someone else's money...as defined by the evil legal system.

3) As President, he plans to get his Justice Dept. to more rigorously enforce existing laws, and to get Congress to pass new laws. You ever heard of the American/European system before? Parliamentary democracy, all that stuff?

New laws? Close the barn door after the cow escaped!

Or the gestapo thing.

I'm thinking you like the gestapo thing as you advocate it.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

It is his problem, and more importantly, ours. It's going to put 241,000 people on the welfare roles as a bad side effect of his poorly thought out policy. That's more than you can afford.

Breaking up a bank into smaller financial entities doesn't mean you fire everyone.

It is interesting that you now support Obama's bailing out the banks.

 

[Denny Crane]

Breaking up a bank into smaller financial entities doesn't mean you fire everyone.

It is interesting that you now support Obama's bailing out the banks.

I don't support Obama bailing out the banks (it was W, but who cares about facts?).

Government should do no harm. A million jobs at these banks is just a wee bit of harm.

 

[jlprk]

Breaking up a bank into smaller financial entities doesn't mean you fire everyone. It is interesting that you now support Obama's bailing out the banks.

Denny has often said that instead of the bailout, Obama should have let the banks fail (which would have called millions of middle class home mortgages into immediate full payback during the banks' bankruptcy proceedings, destroying the middle class).

But now that a Democrat agrees with him, Denny flip flops and worries about bank employees being laid off if the banks subdivide. Imagine the tens of millions of people who would have lost their homes under Denny's pre-flip flop opinion...a lot more than the 1000 unemployed bank employees he claims to worry about now (out of the 241,000 who would be grandfathered into the new, smaller banks created from the old subdivided banks).