Unpatriotic? Wanting to know your enemy inside and out and facing reality is far from unpatriotic. So I'm going to assume I'm misreading your sarcasm and satire.

But he's dead on. So many Americans fail to understand basic history and why so many of the Great Nations of history collapsed. The biggest reasons being fighting too many foreign wars, spending more than they can produce, extreme political disconnect and lack of unity within splintering states.

Political disconnect is so easy to accomplish in times of peace it's rather sad and tragic. Most of the Samurai Code was written in times of peace (such as dying for their master at all costs etc) and we are falling into that paradigm as well to the point it's blinding us to the reality of our own real enemies. </rant>

Lyrics:

“Fight of the Century” Lyrics.

Written by John Papola and Russ Roberts

KEYNES
Here we are… peace out! great recession
thanks to me, as you see, we’re not in a depression
Recovery, destiny if you follow my lesson
Lord Keynes, here I come, line up for the procession

HAYEK
We brought out the shovels but we’re still in a ditch…
And still digging. don’t you think that it’s time for a switch…
From that hair of the dog. Friend, the party is over.
The long run is here. It’s time to get sober!

KEYNES
Are you kidding? my cure works perfectly fine…
have a look, the great recession ended back in ’09.
I deserve credit. Things would have been worse
All the estimates prove it—I’ll quote chapter and verse

HAYEK
Econometricians, they’re ever so pious
Are they doing real science or confirming their bias?
Their “Keynesian” models are tidy and neat
But that top down approach is a fatal conceit

REFRAIN
Which way should we choose?
more bottom up or more top down
…the fight continues…
Keynes and Hayek’s second round

it’s time to weigh in…
more from the top or from the ground
…lets listen to the greats
Keynes and Hayek throwing down

KEYNES
we could have done better, had we only spent more
Too bad that only happens when there’s a World War
You can carp all you want about stats and regression
Do you deny World War II cut short the Depression?

HAYEK
Wow. One data point and you’re jumping for joy
the Last time I checked, wars only destroy
There was no multiplier, consumption just shrank
As we used scarce resources for every new tank

Pretty perverse to call that prosperity
Rationed meat, Rationed butter… a life of austerity
When that war spending ended your friends cried disaster
yet the economy thrived and grew ever faster

KEYNES
You too only see what you want to see
The spending on war clearly goosed GDP
Unemployment was over, almost down to zero
That’s why I’m the master, that’s why I’m the hero

HAYEK
Creating employment’s a straigtforward craft
When the nation’s at war, and there’s a draft
If every worker was staffed in the army and fleet
We’d be at full employment with nothing to eat

REFRAIN REPEATS

HAYEK
jobs are the means, not the ends in themselves
people work to live better, to put food on the shelves
real growth means production of what people demand
That’s entrepreneurship not your central plan

KEYNES
My solution is simple and easy to handle..
its spending that matters, why’s that such a scandal?
The money sloshes through the pipes and the sluices
revitalizing the economy’s juices

it’s just like an engine that’s stalled and gone dark
To bring it to life, we need a quick spark
Spending’s the life blood that gets the flow going
Where it goes doesn’t matter, just get spending flowing

HAYEK
You see slack in some sectors as a “general glut”
But some sectors are healthy, and some in a rut
So spending’s not free – that’s the heart of the matter
too much is wasted as cronies get fatter.

The economy’s not a car, there’s no engine to stall
no expert can fix it, there’s no “it” at all.
The economy’s us, we don’t need a mechanic
Put away the wrenches, the economy’s organic

REFRAIN REPEATS

KEYNES
so what would you do to help those unemployed?
this is the question you seem to avoid
when we’re in a mess, would you just have us wait?
Doing nothing until markets equil-i-brate?

HAYEK
I don’t want to do nothing, there’s plenty to do
The question I ponder is who plans for who?
Do I plan for myself or leave it to you?
I want plans by the many and not by the few.

We shouldn’t repeat what created our troubles
I want real growth not just a series of bubbles
Let’s stop bailing out losers and let prices work
If we don’t try to steer them they won’t go berserk

KEYNES
Come on, Are you kidding? Don’t Wall Street’s gyrations
Challenge your world view of self-regulation?
Even you must admit that the lesson we’ve learned
Is more oversight’s needed or else we’ll get burned

HAYEK
Oversight? The government’s long been in bed
With the Wall Street execs and the firms that they’ve led
Prosperity’s all about profit and loss
When you bail out the losers there’s no end to the cost

the lesson I’ve learned? It’s how little we know,
the world is complex, not some circular flow
the economy’s not a class you can master in college
to think otherwise is the pretense of knowledge

REFRAIN REPEATS

KEYNES
You get on your high horse and you’re off to the races
I look at the world on a case by case basis
When people are suffering I roll up my sleeves
And do what I can to cure our disease

The future’s uncertain, our outlooks are frail
Thats why free markets are so prone to fail
In a volatile world we need more discretion
So state intervention can counter depression

HAYEK
People aren’t chessmen you can move on a board
at your whim–their dreams and desires ignored
With political incentives, discretion’s a joke
The dials you’re twisting… are just mirrors and smoke

We need stable rules and real market prices
so prosperity emerges and cuts short the crisis
give us a chance so we can discover
the most valuable ways to serve one another

FINAL REFRAIN
Which way should we choose?
more bottom up or more top down
the fight continues…
Keynes and Hayek’s second round

it’s time to weigh in…
more from the top or from ground
…lets listen to the greats
Keynes and Hayek throwing down

Bullshit. You voted for Bob motherfucking Barr, who was hands down the most evil person on the ballot next to Lyndon LaRouche.


>> ^blankfist:

>> ^JiggaJonson:
^Maybe I can believe that both are promoting statism but "just as guilty" isn't really fitting.

I rarely find much difference between Democrat and Republican politicians. Both lie about what they're selling you for your vote. Both ultimately increase war spending and increase US imperialism. Both increase spending and give corporations a hand job.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for an evil.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^JiggaJonson:
^Maybe I can believe that both are promoting statism but "just as guilty" isn't really fitting.

I rarely find much difference between Democrat and Republican politicians. Both lie about what they're selling you for your vote. Both ultimately increase war spending and increase US imperialism. Both increase spending and give corporations a hand job.

Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for an evil.


Truth.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

^Maybe I can believe that both are promoting statism but "just as guilty" isn't really fitting.

I rarely find much difference between Democrat and Republican politicians. Both lie about what they're selling you for your vote. Both ultimately increase war spending and increase US imperialism. Both increase spending and give corporations a hand job.


Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for an evil.

And war spending is miniscule compared to entitlement spending.

>> ^gtjwkq:
So Kucinich's argument is "if government is wasting so much money on wars and bailouts, why can't it waste just a few more on healthcare?". Two wrongs don't make a right.


Except that last I checked, Kucinich also wants us out of Iraq and Afghanistan, as well wanting to make large cuts in the defense industry. It's not a question of two wrongs making a right, it's simply a question of moving money we're already spending. In fact, because we spend so much on "defense", we could cover the cost and then some if we were willing to cut war spending.

Like Matt Tabbai said, they have a peasant mentality.

They would never dream of criticizing the billonaires and the financial institutions that are fucking them over, and it never crossed their pea-sized brains to complain when Bush was running up our deficit with war spending, but now they're all "patriots" who have had enough of "Obamarx" who hasn't even been in office for 90 days.

The pea-brained right: America's pride.

"Here is an undeniable fact: Obama is substantially increasing US military spending, by at least $21 billion from Bush-era levels, including a significant ratcheting up of Afghanistan war spending, as well as more money for unmanned attack drones, which are increasingly being used in attacks on Pakistan. (David Swanson over at AfterDowningStreet.org does a great job of breaking down some of the media coverage of this issue across the political spectrum)."

(source)

Just another establishment tool from the party of spineless sons of bitches.

I FEEL LIKE YELLING HERE, APOLOGIES TO ALL WITH SENSITIVE EARDRUMS.

If the free market is such a great dynamo of the economy over fiscal expenditure and government explain to me why we had a Wall street bailout?

BECAUSE GOVERNMENT FORCED BANKS TO GIVE HOUSES TO POOR PEOPLE WHO COULDN'T AFFORD THEM IN THE NAME OF "FAIRNESS". TAXOCRATS BUY THE ALLEGIANCE OF "THE POOR" WITH TAX DOLLARS. BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE A VICTIM?

ME AGAINST ALL BAILOUTS. STILL AM. FAILED CONSERVATIVE LIKE BUSH STILL NOT EQUAL SOCIALIST IDEOLOGUE WHO NOW SEEK TRILLION DOLLARS ON A TARGET GIFT CARD. IT'S SCUM POLITICIANS' WET DREAM, ALL MONEY/NO ACCOUNTABILITY.

What are you going to say now? The banking industry is not deregulated enough? The fed wasn't lax enough? The SEC shouldn't exist so more money could be rolled and rolled over in toxic packages? socialism? credit controls were not lax enough? What about regressive credit card debt? diminishing middle class? housing market bubble? run away government spending? defense spending? loss of capital infrastructure? lack of progressive tax structures? loosening of tax codes to corporate entities? run away trade deficit? increased federal debt? billions per month in Iraq that don't go to troops? spending on the drug war? spending on abstinence programs that don't work?

IT CALLED SPENDING MORE THAN YOU MAKE. YOU/ME DO IT AND GO BROKE OR TO JAIL. GOVERNMENT DO IT AND GET AWAY WITH IT...THAT WHY BIG GOVERNMENT SUCKS.

ME AGAINST 90% OF FEDERAL GOVT. TOO BIG, TOO POWERFUL. ALL UNCONSTITUTIONAL NONSENSE MUST GO.

Don't blame the previous 8 years of economic fumbling on a incoming president. At least he is trying to formulate a plan to avert disaster, unfortunately the free market doesn't care about the welfare of the economy as a whole, there is no invisible hand to pick up the American economy, notice the large manufacturing sector that has moved almost all production overseas.

FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY OF TAXOCRATS GOES ALL WAY BACK TO CARTER; BEFORE HIM, FAILED WELFARE SOCIETIES OF FDR AND LBJ. KENNEDY LAST LIBERAL TO DEMAND LOW TAXES FOR PROSPERITY.

They don't care about the American economy, they care about their own profits that is free market economics, fiscal spending and government stimulus is needed now to create a net injection into the economy.

HYPERINFLATION IS WHAT OBAMA WILL BRING.

The market plunged because Obama didn't promise any kind of net government bailout and you are here crying about socialism and new deals.

What do you think that says.

IT SAYS THERE NOTHING SO BAD ON OWN GOVERNMENT CAN'T MAKE WORSE. IF OBAMA WANT QUICK RECOVERY, HE SLASH TAXES FURTHER AND PROMISE NOT INTERFERE. HE INTEND GROW THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT VIA GAMMA RADIATION.

POLITICIANS = INSECURE CLOWNS WITH TERRIBLE EGOS. THEY WANT BE HEROES BY PRETENDING TO STOP CRISES THEY CREATED IN 1ST PLACE! THEY 'TAKE ACTION' EVEN WHEN ACTION MAKE WORSE.

HULK SMASH.

imstellar28 and qm,

If the free market is such a great dynamo of the economy over fiscal expenditure and government explain to me why we had a Wall street bailout?

What are you going to say now? The banking industry is not deregulated enough? The fed wasn't lax enough? The SEC shouldn't exist so more money could be rolled and rolled over in toxic packages? socialism? credit controls were not lax enough? What about regressive credit card debt? diminishing middle class? housing market bubble? run away government spending? defense spending? loss of capital infrastructure? lack of progressive tax structures? loosening of tax codes to corporate entities? run away trade deficit? increased federal debt? billions per month in Iraq that don't go to troops? spending on the drug war? spending on abstinence programs that don't work?

Don't blame the previous 8 years of economic fumbling on a incoming president. At least he is trying to formulate a plan to avert disaster, unfortunately the free market doesn't care about the welfare of the economy as a whole, there is no invisible hand to pick up the American economy, notice the large manufacturing sector that has moved almost all production overseas.

They don't care about the American economy, they care about their own profits that is free market economics, fiscal spending and government stimulus is needed now to create a net injection into the economy.

The market plunged because Obama didn't promise any kind of net government bailout and you are here crying about socialism and new deals.

What do you think that says.

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^Constitutional_Patriot:
It's almost like no one's backing the Republicans.

It's exactly like that. Republican supporters either are too selfish to give their "hard-earned" money to the Man or they are economically savvy enough to brace themselves for the next market crash/tax hike for war spending/natural disaster at the hand of their spiteful and puny god/etc. And with no social safety net worth the name, they must keep their money somewhere safe, preferably in a sock somewhere near a gun.

Notice not one of them mentions the rampant war spending combined with tax cuts for the rich.

There are more people running around now with no morals, values or ethics and little understanding of basic human nature and history.

I know. And yet, people still brought back the Bush administration in 2004. It boggles the mind, really.

[...] you've been programmed by a lying, deeply-in-denial left-wing media circus as well as a government "education" that celebrates the collective over the individual. I'm not blinded by hatred of Bush so I can reasonably explain where he is lacking.

I haven't been programmed by anything or anybody, and I resent you for even bringing that up. You're a button pusher, and nothing more.

I hate Bush for what he's done to the Middle East, to the world's view of us, and to our domestic programs. That information doesn't come from a left-wing conspiracy. I saw him land on the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, donning a flight suit he hasn't worn since the 70s, and stating "Mission Accomplished." I see that after 5 years of bloodshed, Iraq is nowhere near the point of standing up so we can stand down. I talk to my friends, one of whom is missing an eye because Bush sent him to Iraq to fight people who were not a threat to us. And all this while the Taliban is reconstituted in Waziristan. I don't need a left-wing conspiracy to understand the mentality of our Dictator, because it's right in front of me every day. And it's not on the nightly news; it's in the talks I have with staunch Republicans who despise Bush for sending them to Iraq four of five times. It's also with the Republicans who lambaste Bush for spending like he's a Democrat with a trust fund. So don't tell me I've been programmed, just because you think everything you disagree with is a conspiracy.

You mention the Congress holds the real power, and I agree with you, to an extent. They do hold the purse strings. And I hate them for every time they've bowed like a guilty dog when Bush smacks their nose and demands money for his wars. But the fact is, no matter how much I hate Congress for funding the wars, I hate Bush even more for STARTING THEM! Congress wouldn't need to debate a war spending bill if Bush wasn't so thick-headed and gung-ho about destroying the Middle East. Place the blame where it belongs, but place it in the amount that it is necessary.

CURRY: You don’t agree with that? It has nothing do with the economy, the war — spending on the war?
BUSH: I don’t think so...