Well, in a same political system, the Republicans would basically cease to exist. Right now, they're trying to be two things, a "sensible" centre right party and extreme social conservative nut jobs. But the US already has a conservative centre right party, they're the Democrats.

The tea party should just be honest and form the American Taliban or whatever, the moderate republicans can go to the dems and people who actually want real social change can start a full on godless liberal commie Labour Party, cos god knows they couldn't fuck it up worse than it already has been.

I had to call my grandpa sir. I grew up most of my childhood hearing my father refer to him as sir, as well. However, he was not a very nice man, my grandpa. If my father didn't call him sir, I'm pretty certain he would get a beating... even as an adult. >.<
If only gramps had been a kinder man like the one in this video. Alas, now we pick up hitchhikers and murder them, using their faces for halloween masks. Hail satan! Down with the commies!

I can't wait for Fox News to denounce Madison as a pinko-commie-marxist for explicitly stating that there are social classes.

First things first: I read the article you linked as well as three others by the same author, given that he's teaching at a nearby facility. His article "The Three Types of Austerity" was quite enough to know that I'll never see eye-to-eye with him, or anyone of the same views.

"[Austerity] frees up resources for private investment" is a statement that does not match my perception of reality, given the absolute abundance of (financial) resources within the eurozone. It's a lack of demand for investments that's the problem, not supply. Savings are at record highs, investment is at an all-time low.

So, demand vs supply... we all know that discussion won't be resolved here, ever. It's utterly pointless. Same for the gold standard vs fiat, inflation good or bad, or any related discussion, really.

Instead, I'll try to reply to unrelated statements.

------------

"Do you think The Wire paid for their production assistants' healthcare? Did they make more than the $50/day for their 12 hour days (if they weren't working for free as "interns" for the 'privilege' of 'paying their dues' in 'the industry')?"

I know nothing about the situation on set of The Wire. My assumption is that it involved the regular amount of abuse of labour, including unpaid interns.

------------

"Haha, of course, "liberals" get a pass from other "liberals", but no pass for the Kochtopus (even though the Kochs give way more money to charities than The Wire would even be able to)."

Well, good for them. But I don't see why you drag them in here. You made a set of rhetoric questions aimed at hypocrisy by David Simon. I pointed out my view that any possible hypocrisy is dwarfed by the point he made vis-a-vis guilt/Perkins/watch/whatever.

------------

"Yeah? Like you know (the other) David Simon and can vouch for his "lack of guilt?" And "guilt" about what? Having money? Being successful?"

Feeling guilty about the discussion amongst the establishment regarding, for instance, the minimum wage. He finds it questionable how one can argue against giving a fella at Burger King 10-12 bucks an hour without feeling guilty for it. That's the disconnect we're talking about. When extremely wealthy individuals deny even the crumbs to the folks at the bottom.

Shamelessness was my addition, my interpretation. It was aimed at the demand for tax breaks and subsidies for extremely profitable corporations or extremely wealthy individuals. I would feel ashamed for any demands to my benefit if a) I didn't objectively need them and b) they would come at a detriment to others in worse situations than me.

Since I'm arguing from a different economic perspective than you, a shortfall in tax income (aka tax breaks) to me means either more taxes at another place, probably from weaker entitities who can't afford to buy their own representative, or a cut in essential services. I operate under a very broad definition of human dignity and see it as the first and foremost objective. Food, shelter, health, etc for all -- which might just be a reason why some people refer to me as a "pinko commie".

------------

"Does he? Really? How? And how are you doing more for "society" than that? Who are you and what exactly is your great "contribution" to society?"

He "weakens" society, economically, by suppressing aggregate demand. The more wealth you accumulate, the less of it, as a percentage, translates into demand. For an economy that depends on the circulation of goods and services, a massive and non-temporary accumulation of debt or savings (same coin, different sides) in the hands of single players (be it state, corporation or individual) chokes up the system. Less demand, less investment, less growth.
Accumulation is all fine and dandy if it translates into economic activity, but given the pathetic % of GDP that is being invested, despite mountains of unused cash that are forced into financial shenanigans looking for profit, I'd say it is dead weight and a drag.

But since you apparently share the views of Hollenbeck, all of that was probably hogwash to you.

------------

To answer your question: a human being and my great contribution to society is my charming personality, of course.

And with that, I bid you adieu. I've had long-ass discussions about Snowden/surveillance and other topics that led nowhere and I'm not interested in having one about economic theory, especially not in a second language. The floor is all yours, including the last word.

Chomsky's title of his next book is, 'This Book, Brought To You By Capitalism!'

u mad, commies?

Really? It was a 1984 reference? Gee, thanks mister, I totally didn't get that, nosiree.

And while you can try to make an argument that taxation is theft, to state it outright like that is confusing opinion with fact. Most people do not view taxation as theft. It is part of a social contract.

So in the space of the first paragraph, you have engaged in a false premise and then brought up them evil commies and nazis. Yeah, this is a worthwhile argument....

I have zero interest in contacting Murphy, and I'm not surprised Krugman doesn't want to debate him either. As Dawkins says about debating creationists, "it looks good on your resume, not on mine".

1) "The Democratic Party in Europe would be a far-right party".

I don't think it would be. A decade ago, yes. But not today.

Look at what Blair (Labour) and Schröder (SPD) did to the left-of-center parties in their respective countries: they moved to the right, significantly. And by doing so, the entire political sphere was pushed to the right. Tory and CDU, the former right-of-center parties are not that different from the Democratic Party, nowadays at least.

The French are still holding on to the alignment of their political system. However, the austerity enforced by conservative moralists, mainly the troika of IMF/ECB/EU Commision as well as the German establishment, is putting immense pressure on Hollande to "encourage" a political shift to the right.

2) Resistance from within the political system.

We have two of these parties in this country, parties that, to some degree, oppose the establishment in areas of significance. They manage to mitigate some of the damage the establishment tries to inflict upon society, but if we're honest about it, most of it is only postponed by a comparatively short period of time. One might even argue that it's just for show so that the illusion of choice is kept up...

In any case, they cannot create the level of fear neccessary to keep the other parties in check. For that to change, the ownership structure in traditional media would have to be changed, radically. As of now, the marginalisation of anti-establishment forces is working effectively and any attempts at meaningful change are demonised.

3) A recently published document by JP Morgan illustrates just how openly their efforts against democratic societies are being waged these days:

Political systems around the [European] periphery typically display several of the following features: weak executives; weak central states relative to regions; constitutional protection of labour rights; consensus building systems which foster political clientalism; and the right to protest if unwelcome changes are made to the political status quo.

The shortcomings of this political legacy have been revealed by the crisis.

Btw, @Fletch

Holy fuck...just holy fuck. Good reasoning Fletch, on all parts. Mindless drones on both sides always piss me off and I am glad to see you have an open mind. I remember my first year on the Sift when I came with a partially positive outlook on cops, yet pointed out when they were fucktards--I was this commie cum dumpster that everyone loved to hate... But my views are mostly like yours (Just a little less jaded.)

And we wonder why cops get jaded...

He is a member of the Industrial Workers of the World, who's stated goal is the destruction of capitalism and wage labor. Chomsky is a linguist and likes to play word games, but words mean things.
At the least, he is more pro-commie than pro-capitalism. He makes his living off of the wages of others, so I don't know why he's so pro-communism. Perhaps he could make more money if his socialist utopia was realized.

Every commie has an opinion.

So maher is ready to associate Mitt with every extremist on the right, but somehow that wasn't the case with His Earness and say, Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, and a list as long as your arm of commies, koo-koos, freaks and muslim terrorist sympathizers.

Go back to your sewer of bitterness, maher.

Yeah I don't want gubment coming between me and my feces.>> ^rottenseed:

This is 'Merrikuh...you can do whatever you'd like with the feces you own...unless of course you live in some socialist-commie country like Europe...er...sumthin'>> ^KnivesOut:
When you say "my feces" do you mean feces I created, or just feces that I own?
I would just like a clarification before I vote.

This is 'Merrikuh...you can do whatever you'd like with the feces you own...unless of course you live in some socialist-commie country like Europe...er...sumthin'>> ^KnivesOut:

When you say "my feces" do you mean feces I created, or just feces that I own?
I would just like a clarification before I vote.

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Who gives you candy, Jesus or Castro?(anti-commie film clip). Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

>> ^kymbos:

An empire in decline, on an accelerating trajectory.


All the empire in decline talk seems a bit short sighted to me. How long have women had the right to vote? How long have blacks had equal rights? The last 100 years has seen an enormous upward trajectory to go with the downward stuff that's happening in recent memory. Things are still 'up' from the days of McCarthy and a commie behind every Bush.