Austrians are the most honest school out of the mess that is economics, Keynesianism is the pseudo-scientific nonsense that unfortunately is predominant, it's like as if astronomy were 90% astrology. Paul Krugman is a keynesian witch doctor, I couldn't care less what is the product of his intelectual dishonesty.

The Fed is a secretive entity with govt given powers but no govt oversight, there is a bill in Congress to audit the Federal Reserve for exactly that reason: Even the govt doesn't know what the Fed does!

So your argument is that if markets are so smart, why don't they adapt to this huge entity that has a monopoly on the currency and prosper anyway? Why aren't you asking the opposite of that: If the Fed is so predictably and correctly setting interest rates, why isn't most of the market making the right long-term decisions?

Booms and busts happen naturally in a market, but they have a much smaller scale and cause minimal destruction when central banks are not involved. When a considerable portion of the market makes wrong decisions and we get huge booms and busts, you can bet your mortgage that the govt/Fed is involved, a lot of people making very wrong decisions all at once can't be just an unfortunate coincidence.

Maybe if the market could create their own currencies, we'd have parallel competing currencies, and no one would be confined to the arbitrary rules of the unwarranted and unnecessary monopoly that is the Fed. The best money would naturally be chosen by the market itself. Ever thought of that?

Central banks are not creations of the market, they are only possible because of govt. They shouldn't coexist with capitalism.

>> ^blankfist:
>> ^burdturgler:
What does that term mean exactly? "Family neighborhood"? A "family neighborhood" as opposed to which other kinds of neighborhoods? And is sex allowed in these "family neighborhoods"?
Certainly "his kids" are not "exposed to people getting paid to fuck every day"? I mean, certainly these dregs of society, these "fat skanks", are trying to be discrete, right? I'd say being closed inside the back of a truck is about as discrete as any bedroom in any of your "family neighborhoods".
This cameraman is not a hero. He's a puritanical asshole who is incapable of coexisting with anyone who chooses to live their lives differently than him. And maybe so are you, burdy.


I really hate semantics but you're right, not a very well defined term. I don't know about where you live, but it's been my experience that cities, towns, villages etc get divided up into smaller sections. Those are called "neighborhoods" .. usually because you know your neighbors. Those are the places where our kids grow up. Where we try to make friends and meet other families that you trust to help create a safe environment for our children to play in. Yes, there are other places that families live. Shitty, unfortunate places that .. well I wouldn't call it a "family neighborhood". What should I call it? A fucked up set of buildings with people living in them that are drug addicts and completely ignored by anyone who could make a difference there? Again, I don't know what you're experience has been .. but have you ever lived somewhere that was a shitty place to grow up? I have.

There's going to be two views here. You want to fight the cameraman? Or do do you want to fight the law? Don't blame the cameraman for being the "puritanical asshole" fighting the law when the law is the problem. I'm perfectly capable of living with and even celebrating those different than me .. hell I go out of my way almost every day in one way or another to support shit I have no vested interest in. So here's a big Fuck You for that insult. But that doesn't mean my eight year old has to watch some slut negotiate for a blow job in front of the Burger King.

>> ^burdturgler:
This is a guy in a family neighborhood picking up some fat skank and fucking her in the denny's(?) parking lot and you upvote the comment that says the camera guy should get beat? The camera guy is doing the job the cops should be doing. His kids are exposed to people getting paid to fuck every day. I think the guys a frigging hero.


What does that term mean exactly? "Family neighborhood"? A "family neighborhood" as opposed to which other kinds of neighborhoods? And is sex allowed in these "family neighborhoods"?

Certainly "his kids" are not "exposed to people getting paid to fuck every day"? I mean, certainly these dregs of society, these "fat skanks", are trying to be discrete, right? I'd say being closed inside the back of a truck is about as discrete as any bedroom in any of your "family neighborhoods".

This cameraman is not a hero. He's a puritanical asshole who is incapable of coexisting with anyone who chooses to live their lives differently than him. And maybe so are you, burdy.

You walked out, dag?! But you missed the best part at the end when (SPOILER ALERT) Ewan McGregor parachutes back to earth unconscious and violently takes out a group of pedestrians with his limp appendages. I kid you not, that is in the movie, and it is hilariously out of place. The movie wasn't terrible, but then again I didn't go in with high expectations.

@KP, that probably had more to do with the volume set by the projectionist. Although, when a movie is perceived as "loud" it could just be that the mix has proper highs and lows without it being compressed -- don't think compression with a codec, but compressing the high and low ranges into middle ranges so explosions and dialogue can coexist in the same shot without the explosion overtaking the dialogue like it would in reality.

The Incredible Hulk sound mix also has a wide spread between lows and highs, which I'm a fan of. But, yeah, Terminator was a huge let down. So was Wolverine. Being an avid comic reader of Wolvie back in the day, I think they missed a number of opportunities with revealing his bone claws, but whatever...

So far, Star Trek is the big summer movie to see. Sad.

>> ^BansheeX:
>> ^jwray:
Free markets can coexist with progressive income tax and government services. Libertarians tend to conflate economic liberty with flatter systems of taxation and a lack of needful public services like healthcare.

We need more socialized medicine like we need a hole in the head. The model you're suggesting is forced appropriation to create a national credit card of sorts that works until the country can no longer repay its debts in real terms (or more accurately, until its creditors realize this to be the case and stop financing the country's debt and artificially low rates). We're far past the point of having domestic credit, this is the very late stages to depend on exponential foreign credit. Our desire for life-prolonging procedures is unlimited, but our productive capacity to finance it is not. That is why prices are so high and quality so poor in government models. If it's just a national credit card whose compounding interest we finance by continuously finding more foreign investment, what's stopping a servicer from charging as much as he can and when does the foreign credit being "invested" in that increasingly expensive, non-exportable service eventually tap out?
We're like Madoff with a printing press, every time a bond matures we print another one. Since we severed gold-backing in 1971 but retained reserve status, we just export paper promises in exchange for goods, and until now foreigners have snatched them up. This is the fundamental realization that separates libertarians from stupider parts of the population: benefiting in the short-term at some greater long-term expense is not a good trade-off. Eventually it gets to a point where you get so hooked on that lifestyle that the credit junky rejects the withdrawal symptoms come time to save rather than consume. So the government just tries to inflate away the debt and you get bubble after bubble until the bond market itself is a bubble. Because if bond interest is insufficiently compensatory for the devaluation of the currency it promises to pay, why the hell would you buy them? If the effect of devaluation is only hidden by the fact that foreigners are hoarding rather than spending them, that's circular logic to suggest that dollars aren't losing value so long as you never use them to bid up the prices of products.
People wonder how countries like the UK and the USA went from rich creditors and manufacturing powerhouses to leading debtors who run deficits to consume rather than increase exportable production. All in a relatively short period of time. This is precisely how we did it, and as much shared blame you can point on needless military adventures post WWII, a borrow and spend health care model can only lead to squalor.
Recently, a relative of mine had a few procedures done on medicare (the second procedure was begotten by an infection caused during the first one). The doctors sent a bunch of excess equipment to our house and we couldn't return it. Some of it was still in its packaging, and the steel thing that holds up the intravenous bags? Wouldn't take that back either. The cost of her hospital stay and multiple invasive procedures was $150,000. Her out of pocket was only $100. It would take me a decade to earn that much after taxes, it was put on the national charge card in one week. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is going to end badly. People like David Walker have tried to warn people and were ignored for years. People's ignorance and sense of entitlement is too great now to elect someone who will stop the currency crisis before it happens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh-NqdmEDq4
You may now continue hitting your neo-con pinata.


I'm not talking about letting the government write a blank check for ridiculously overpriced private healthcare services.

Government shouldn't spend a penny on private health services or private health insurance, or interfere with them at all. It should just set up its own separate clinics that offer basic services at low cost and subsidize preventative care. This could be done for a tiny fraction of the cost of the Iraq war. Sweden spends a lower percentage of its GDP on healthcare than the USA, yet has 3 years longer life expectancy and half the infant mortality. That's socialism for you!

>> ^jwray:
Free markets can coexist with progressive income tax and government services. Libertarians tend to conflate economic liberty with flatter systems of taxation and a lack of needful public services like healthcare.


We need more socialized medicine like we need a hole in the head. The model you're suggesting is forced appropriation to create a national credit card of sorts that works until the country can no longer repay its debts in real terms (or more accurately, until its creditors realize this to be the case and stop financing the country's debt and artificially low rates). We're far past the point of having domestic credit, this is the very late stages to depend on exponential foreign credit. Our desire for life-prolonging procedures is unlimited, but our productive capacity to finance it is not. That is why prices are so high and quality so poor in government models. If it's just a national credit card whose compounding interest we finance by continuously finding more foreign investment, what's stopping a servicer from charging as much as he can and when does the foreign credit being "invested" in that increasingly expensive, non-exportable service eventually tap out?

We're like Madoff with a printing press, every time a bond matures we print another one. Since we severed gold-backing in 1971 but retained reserve status, we just export paper promises in exchange for goods, and until now foreigners have snatched them up. This is the fundamental realization that separates libertarians from stupider parts of the population: benefiting in the short-term at some greater long-term expense is not a good trade-off. Eventually it gets to a point where you get so hooked on that lifestyle that the credit junky rejects the withdrawal symptoms come time to save rather than consume. So the government just tries to inflate away the debt and you get bubble after bubble until the bond market itself is a bubble. Because if bond interest is insufficiently compensatory for the devaluation of the currency it promises to pay, why the hell would you buy them? If the effect of devaluation is only hidden by the fact that foreigners are hoarding rather than spending them, that's circular logic to suggest that dollars aren't losing value so long as you never use them to bid up the prices of products.

People wonder how countries like the UK and the USA went from rich creditors and manufacturing powerhouses to leading debtors who run deficits to consume rather than increase exportable production. All in a relatively short period of time. This is precisely how we did it, and as much shared blame you can point on needless military adventures post WWII, a borrow and spend health care model can only lead to squalor.

Recently, a relative of mine had a few procedures done on medicare (the second procedure was begotten by an infection caused during the first one). The doctors sent a bunch of excess equipment to our house and we couldn't return it. Some of it was still in its packaging, and the steel thing that holds up the intravenous bags? Wouldn't take that back either. The cost of her hospital stay and multiple invasive procedures was $150,000. Her out of pocket was only $100. It would take me a decade to earn that much after taxes, it was put on the national charge card in one week. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this is going to end badly. People like David Walker have tried to warn people and were ignored for years. People's ignorance and sense of entitlement is too great now to elect someone who will stop the currency crisis before it happens.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OS2fI2p9iVs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oh-NqdmEDq4

You may now continue hitting your neo-con pinata.

Free markets can coexist with progressive income tax and government services. Libertarians tend to conflate economic liberty with flatter systems of taxation and a lack of needful public services like healthcare.

I think it's easy to focus on defining labels and miss the concept.
Whatever its cause, whatever it's implying, whatever happens....
flash forward 10-15 years to a potential moment when any one of those children are faced w/ a violent religious situation and they have had a seed planted in them of empathy and coexistance. The odds of good change happening are much better due to what is happening at that school. That's all.

I don't really think you are like the skull guy, just having some fun with you.

As far as I know, not paying your taxes will only result in gun play if you fire first. Paying income tax is part of our system and no one is forcing you to work or live in this country, just like no one is forced to work at Wal*Mart. You can petition the government to change it's stance on income tax, and I can petition the government to change it's stance on abusive corporations, but in the meantime, our reality is what it is.

I don't see poorness as a permanent state of victimhood - which, btw, is classic right wing radio way of demonizing people who give a shit (*fear) - I just believe they shouldn't have to work more than 40 hours a week to make ends meet. I don't think capitalism is immoral, either, but I do think it amoral and have no problem curbing its destructive properties.

It's no mystery why Wal*Mart is popular. Its dirt cheap prices are subsidized by abuse of its workers, union busting, and government welfare. Just because something is popular and successful doesn't mean it is good or healthy. (ex: boy bands, Titanic, sniffing glue)

I'm sure cigarettes and alcohol would be very popular among grade schoolers, but I don't hear anyone lobbying on their behalf. Removing speed limits would probably go over well too, but would be a death warrant for countless people.

I believe LA did mount a large, successful campaign to keep Wal*Mart out, which is a fight most smaller cities are not powerful enough to wage (which is why there should be limits on corporate size and power). There are several Targets in LA, which are better stores anyway. They are much more respectful of employees too.



In reply to this comment by blankfist:
You can try your best to push me to the fringe with your personal attack, but there's a big difference between the guy in the skull mask's message and mine. Here's a little social experiment for you. Why not stop paying your income taxes, and every time you're contacted by the IRS or any government bureaucrat just ignore them. Let's see if they send men with guns to your house. But, that wouldn't be violent, would it? No, they're all "peace officers" there to keep the peace for you and me, right? They would never shoot you or me.

Back to your wage slavery. I think you have a very strong isolationist perspective of people. You see poor people as hapless victims floating alone in the world, unable to get above it all because of an evil capitalist system permeating society around them. They're not alone. We all coexist together. If someone wants to live better, they have a chance to work together to improve their conditions... without Walmart if they choose.

If you don't want Walmarts in your community, then you can always be persuasive and convince people to voluntarily not be patrons of the store. It's not like they moved into every city in the country overnight and destroyed small business by force. They were allowed in and welcomed. Why have you turned me into a defender of Walmart! You bastard!

By the way, I don't see a Walmart in Los Angeles. The closest one is in Long Beach, and it opened a long while back. Maybe people in LA don't want to give up their boutique style shops for that kind of thing? I don't know.

You can try your best to push me to the fringe with your personal attack, but there's a big difference between the guy in the skull mask's message and mine. Here's a little social experiment for you. Why not stop paying your income taxes, and every time you're contacted by the IRS or any government bureaucrat just ignore them. Let's see if they send men with guns to your house. But, that wouldn't be violent, would it? No, they're all "peace officers" there to keep the peace for you and me, right? They would never shoot you or me.

Back to your wage slavery. I think you have a very strong isolationist perspective of people. You see poor people as hapless victims floating alone in the world, unable to get above it all because of an evil capitalist system permeating society around them. They're not alone. We all coexist together. If someone wants to live better, they have a chance to work together to improve their conditions... without Walmart if they choose.

If you don't want Walmarts in your community, then you can always be persuasive and convince people to voluntarily not be patrons of the store. It's not like they moved into every city in the country overnight and destroyed small business by force. They were allowed in and welcomed. Why have you turned me into a defender of Walmart! You bastard!

By the way, I don't see a Walmart in Los Angeles. The closest one is in Long Beach, and it opened a long while back. Maybe people in LA don't want to give up their boutique style shops for that kind of thing? I don't know.

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
If you want to live in an apartment and eat food, work is compulsory. If you live in a small town where WalMart has killed all the local businesses, AND you want to live in an apartment and eat food, then working at WalMart is compulsory. Wage-Slavery.

How about some turn about. If you don't want to pay taxes, then don't own property, work or ever buy anything. You are free to not participate in activities that require you to pay taxes. You are making a choice to pay taxes.

Also, enough of the violent victim fantasies. No one is going to shoot you. You sound like that skull guy.

^Hibernian


You're very correct Hibernian, thanks for pointing it out. I've modified the video title accordingly. She didn't say her son was killed, only that he was in the Army.

Just to clarify, this is a Palestinian Doctor who is very reasonable in regards to a peaceful coexistence between Palestinians and Israelis. He has been living in Israel for some time.

Last week, his family home in Gaza was struck by Israeli shell. The casualties were promptly transported to an Israeli hospital, but he lost 4 family members in the hit (see here for a report). The second part of this video is an Israeli citizen accusing his family of harbouring weaponry or participating in attacks against the IDF.

There's no spin. It's an accurate and fair assessment of the situation. There are more players in the game than just Isreal and the Palestinians. There's plenty of blame to spread around and the situation is not the sole pervue of any one side.

I have more historical perspective than you perhaps, but I recall quite well the peace efforts of the 70s, 80s, 90s, and early 00s where Isreal made concession after concession after concession. But it was never enough. The objective of the militant Pals is not peaceful coexistence. It is the complete elimination of the Isreali state.

Therefore you and others like you are operating from a false position that only exists within the confines of your fantasies. You probably haven't been around long enough, and so you don't remember that this is all ground that has been covered before over and over and over.

You think that Isreal is to blame for this mess because you think there is some mythical 'concession' Isreal could make that would make the Palestinians happy. Baloney. The so-called 'peace' talks of the 70s, 80s, 90s, and early 00s proved unequivocally that there are NO concessions Isreal can make that will satisfy the Palestinians. The only thing that will satisfy them is when Isreal is booted out of 'thier' country.

So your argument is an utterly false magician's choice, and I think even yo know this deep down. Isreal is doing what it thinks it needs to do in order to prevent the deaths of thier citizens. That's the right of any country, and the main duty of a government. I don't blame them for that. They want security from a bunch of uncompromising, half-insane terrorists. Who doesn't?

What the Palestinians need to do is reign in thier extremists and show they are willing to give Isreal a peaceful option that will actually work. Frankly, I don't think that is possible because there are too many factions in the Middle East (Iran, Egypt, Lebanon, et al) that are too intent on keeping a bunch of poor, angry Palestinians around as a stable of useful idiots to funnel bombs to.

I've replied on the thread.

Extremist cultures thrive and become dangerous under oppression - this is what happened in my country. They don't just pop up out of nowhere. And still that culture exists although it has become highly politicised and peaceful in the last 10 years. This is why there has always been solidarity between Ireland and Palestine, there are Palestinian flags and murals in the city where I live.

Israel is now engaged in genocide and the whole world knows it. There is no justification for genocide, ever.

People are being slaughtered out there, trying to justify where you lay blame just isn't good enough.

In reply to this comment by mharvey42:
Irishman - A moving and artistic bit of cinema; with all the honesty of a Leni Riefenstahl film. True, these people lead a tragic existance, because of their sick culture they choose to.

They raise their children on bloodthirsty versions of Mickey Mouse, then send them out with explosives strapped to them. They choose to buy weapons over peaceful impliments. Before the unilateral pullout the Israeli greenhouses in Gaza produced bountiful crops; after, they were smashed in a nihilistic rage.

It's sad, but Gaza has only it's own to blame. I hope for their sake that when this current depraved set of leaders is killed in their tunnels, that the Gazans choose peace and coexistance with the Jews, or it will happen again.

Irishman - A moving and artistic bit of cinema; with all the honesty of a Leni Riefenstahl film. True, these people lead a tragic existance, because of their sick culture they choose to.

They raise their children on bloodthirsty versions of Mickey Mouse, then send them out with explosives strapped to them. They choose to buy weapons over peaceful impliments. Before the unilateral pullout the Israeli greenhouses in Gaza produced bountiful crops; after, they were smashed in a nihilistic rage.

It's sad, but Gaza has only it's own to blame. I hope for their sake that when this current depraved set of leaders is killed in their tunnels, that the Gazans choose peace and coexistance with the Jews, or it will happen again.

A more detailed write up.

Vancouver, with its snowboarders and kayak tours and great produce and Benetton ad-inspired hipster scene, can seem on the surface a little removed from “global issues”. Issues such as Israel’s bombing of Gaza these last few days. Not to mention the worldwide fury stirred by conflict in the Holy Land.

But, for a primer on Vancouver’s connection to the “big picture”, you couldn’t beat this afternoon’s (December 29) pro-Palestinian protest on West Hastings Street.

Palestinian flags were out in force. So were those of Israel, across the street at the small counter-demonstration. The rhetoric was exact, pungent, fierce, furious, and emotional. Speaker after speaker encouraged the 250-strong crowd to shout.

“Free, free Palestine,” Omar Shaban, vice president of the Canadian Arab Federation, chanted. The crowd returned, “Free, free Palestine.”

...

Asif Husain, who attended the event to represent Muslim solidarity, explained to the Straight why he supports Hamas.

“They’re in a difficult position,” he said. “There is no solution to the peace problem so far. Sixty years have gone by with no end in sight.”

Across the street, a yarmulke-bedecked Stephen Burgher agreed there is no obvious solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

“They [Palestinians] want to be ‘free to the sea’ so they want no Israel left,” he said. “I don’t think anyone over here is calling for the destruction of Palestine. For peace, you’ve got to start off with somebody who’s a partner. You’ve got to start off with someone who is willing to talk to you about coexistence. If they want to destroy you, it’s not negotiation time; it’s war time. And I think it’s necessary, it’s sad to say.”

Hanna Kawas of the Canada Palestine Association blamed the ongoing conflict on the United Nations and the U.S.

“Yesterday was the 43rd veto in support of Israel,” Kawas said. “No other country in the world has been protected as Israel. And they’re doing it basically to cover the war crimes of the Israeli government. The U.S. is complicit in these war crimes. The M16s are American, the ammunition is American, and Israelis doing it on behalf of the U.S. Without them, Israel doesn’t exist.”