Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Charliebrown that question you have asked has been at the forefront of Spanish writing for the last 150 years. Almost every famour latin author in the "new world" has tried to address this issue. This is also one of the main roots for all the communist takeovers in Latin America over the last 150 years.

I would say that most of those countries were left in the hands of the elite (criollos) who did not want to see the status quo changed and the fact that their constitutions were no where near what the US constitution was.

I think another factor is the mixture of all the races and not having a homogeneous population. If you look all over the world any place that has definitive lines drawn between race, ethnicity or religion you have turmoil, civil war and economic upheaval. The Balkans for example.

As much as the US is supposedly a melting pot most of the people in this country the last 200 years have been caucasian and Christians. This group consolidated its power to create a more homogeous population but also allowed minorities (minority in the sense of italian/irish for example and even african americans) to create business's and their own communities that after a generation were totally assimilated into the culture and language.

You can still go to places in Brasil that speak German and one town Brumenau has one of the top 5 Oktoberfests in the world every year. You can clearly see the concept I spoke about above at work in Brasil because in the south (Santa Catarina State etc) the cities are very organized and built like northern European cities and predominately caucasian. In the center of Brasil like Rio de Janeiro the cities are chaotic and disorganized. You can also see this in Canada with French speaking Quebec and the rest of English speaking Canada. Although they are both caucasian Quebec wants to split away from Canada and be its own country because of its unique culture and that they speak French.

This is in no way a promotion for a homogeneous society or culture, I prefer multicultural places thus the reason I spend so much time in Rio. I think there is a reason why East Asian countries seem so organized and the countries well put together and that is their unique homogeneous societies.

[SamAdams]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

It seems you really need to brush up on your economics.

The Chicago school is the one which is the inheritor of laissez faire capitalism - which is to say that standards and regulations impede the ability of the free market to reduce prices.

Goldman Sachs and the TBTF using their money to buy influence is free market.

Monopolies are free market.

The gigantic real estate control fraud is free market.


I'd think it is fairly obvious: the US has in the past invested in education, infrastructure, and thus productivity increases.

Central and South America have not.

Central and South America also had the bonus disadvantage of having been looted by the Spanish and Portuguese for well over a century, and even longer depending on what you term the 'non-native' ruling elites of those nations.

US investment increases productivity? Do you mean to say federal spending improves education and infrastructure?

Yes of course you are using the same kind of language so many often use to distort free markets. Of course you are simply describing some politically connected economists example of deregulation which is really just half-assed free market reform. Kind of like morbidly obese people talking about consuming one salad a year as eating healthy. Let's not pretend that these situations are free from government interference just because they may have largely to do with so called private corporations.

None of these are free-market, unless you define free market as government granted liability institutions that are able to use government backed rules and regulations to maintain their market status. These corporations would never grow to the size they are now in a true free market without state supported liability protection, government licenses, intellectual property, minimum wage laws, etc. Realtors are a completely fabricated cartel supported by the state. GS made most of its money thru government loans for God's sakes. Real estate licenses? The Federal Reserve System? Until I can legally sell my neighbors house without a license or issue my own currency their ain't no free market in banking nor real estate. The US grew out of its allowance of actors in the free market to do their own thing, however government was there growing as a parasite on the backs of all that productivity. So with a small government comes the *potential* for great growth which ironically winds up growing the government more in the long run. As those small successful actors in a free market become bigger they inevitably look to government to secure their power. Google and Facebook are great examples of free market successes that now use the government to maintain their dominance by cutting all kinds of back room deals that empower both the government and the corporations. When Facebook started it had almost no government influence whatsoever, now its a tool used by local law enforcement to track down underage drinkers and there are laws on the books to restrict how Facebook content is seen by children. Facebook must conform to the legal system if they want to survive as a legal corporation. As such it becomes a symbiotic relationship of state and corporation at the exclusion of upstarts. If I started Facebook or Craigslist today and got to any size at all on the radar of regulators I would immediately be forced to comply with the same kinds of silly rules Facebook now needs to comply with and it would likely prevent me from growing much larger. If the state did not exist, Facebook would instead need to rely on good customer service and healthy relations with employees to survive and it would be much more open to threats of competition and disgruntled employees from starting their own competing firms.

By insider trading I mean why do you think anyone even wants to be in Congress? Control of who makes the rules of course. Many Congressmen and women have multiplied their personal fortunes many times over. The ROI on lobbying in Congress is outstanding and any Congressman can certainly help to a piece of that pie! You will never be able to divorce influence of money from politcal power, I don't care what the laws say since those who write the laws are drawn to these positions to break them. You can only remove the weapons of the state, by dissolving the state, from the hands of those with money to buy the state's influence. The Federal Reserve system was devised because banks at the time had such a hard time developing their cartels with so many firms splitting from the cartel's desires. If firms are free from the threat of violence of the state you will always have competitors stepping in to diminish excess profits or breaking away from cartels designed to charge excess prices to customers. Campaign finance reform won't fix that corruption, no matter how many baby kissing honest-sounding folks you elect. Once in power the vast majority will be corrupted even if they started with good intentions. Such is the system.

http://www.financialsense.com/financ...w-them-all-out

[lektrode]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

I suggest you review Ritholtz's treatment of this claim here.

very good couple of stories there, mr o - well butressed with facts, with just a dash of positioning somewhat selectively the critical items that leaves me to think he's grinding the dems axe on this topic - first off, 'he's one of them' (a FIREman) and a quant, to boot:

Ritholtz is chief executive of FusionIQ, a quantitative research firm.

not that theres any particular problem with his trade, other than they are the 'rocket scientists' in the whole equation, who's complex theories and computer models allowed the Big Game with derivitives etc to launch in the first place?

altho the rest of his 2liner bio looks good to me

He is the author of “Bailout Nation” and runs a finance blog, the Big Picture.

so i can/will give him the benefit of the doubt somewhat (vs say somebody like krugman)

but this is what eye found interesting, and it starts in the opening line of your ref'd link:

It’s fair to say that our discussion about the big lie touched a nerve.

following the link to the big lie brings us to a fairly well balanced presentation and i wont quible much with any of it other than where he places this couple pgphs, AT THE VERY BOTTOM, of The Big Lie???

●Glass-Steagall legislation, which kept Wall Street and Main Street banks walled off from each other, was repealed in 1998. This allowed FDIC-insured banks, whose deposits were guaranteed by the government, to engage in highly risky business. It also allowed the banks to bulk up, becoming bigger, more complex and unwieldy.
●Many states had anti-predatory lending laws on their books (along with lower defaults and foreclosure rates). In 2004, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency federally preempted state laws regulating mortgage credit and national banks. Following this change, national lenders sold increasingly risky loan products in those states. Shortly after, their default and foreclosure rates skyrocketed.
Bloomberg was partially correct: Congress did radically deregulate the financial sector, doing away with many of the protections that had worked for decades. Congress allowed Wall Street to self-regulate, and the Fed the turned a blind eye to bank abuses.

so i think its just a teeeny bit disengenuous of him to use his very skilled wordsmithing to attempt to deflect attention (not to mention anger) away from the REAL CAUSE (too much intervention/manipulation in&by congress and will show MY bias and suggest it was the liberals on both sides of the aisle who are ultimately responsible) and back onto the FIRE brigade - while at same time headlines his otherwise very good list of 'causes' (of The Big Lie) with the ULTIMATE CAUSE:

And what about those facts? To be clear, no single issue was the cause. Our economy is a complex and intricate system. What caused the crisis? Look:
●Fed Chair Alan Greenspan dropped rates to 1 percent — levels not seen for half a century — and kept them there for an unprecedentedly long period. This caused a spiral in anything priced in dollars (i.e., oil, gold) or credit (i.e., housing) or liquidity driven (i.e., stocks).

and why did that happen?
because all his buddies there in lower manhattan (ground zero and capitol of blue state limosine LIBERALville) had sold hundreds of billions worth of soon to be worthless dot.bomb stocks, and levered up derivitives into the trillions ?
and about the time smart people (our benefactor here, for instance - the janszen dude.. uh... sorry EJ... i mean Mr Janszen) started to notice that perhaps a buzzword-infested biz plan written by a 20something with its primary asset consisting of website with catchy graphix and a marketing siren-song, just might not really be worth billions, merely because the slicksters at GS and JPM were able to launch an IPO into the stratosphere??

and the resulting blow-out so thoroughly f__ked the economy that greenspan may not have had much choice (at least initially) and then... after one of the quickest elevator shaft stock dropouts in history, some previously known 'financial genius' that was deemed 'not important' enough to be collared where they had him in the sudan - was allowed to ESCAPE? sometime in the '90s?.... and do what?... its like 9/11 never happened fer chrisakes!

and for what?
because of some little tweak in the rules separating the domestic from the international spooks??? (fbi vs cia)so they couldnt compare notes??? yeah, ok - i guess none of that matters, its all the fault of the bad ole republicans and the laissez-faire crowd.... uh huh, yeah right.

but whatever, mr o - i'm just a kinda slow/uneducated tradesman who cuts wires and turns screws for a livin, couldnt possible know what i'm typin about here, so i'll shut up now... sorry for the interuption.

[c1ue]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Obviously the ultimate goal of any company is to have 100% market share which is thus a monopoly.

Generally speaking, when you're in a hole, you stop digging.

A monopoly is not the same as 100% market share.

A monopoly is where one company controls the market - it can be 80%, it can even be 40%.

This is what Ayn Rand was saying. Competition between companies eventually creates one company that may dominate the industry but what you conveniently leave out of your statements above is that another company will come on and take market share from the monopolistic company IF the government does not restrict barriers to entry. I think we can all agree that the problem becomes when the business gets in bed with the government and because of that relationship the entry for any other company in that business is stopped by government.

If Ayn Rand is where you learned your economics, then it is clear why your understanding is so skewed.

Monopoly is not about 'winning competition'. Monopoly is about using other means to keep out/keep down competition.

Did Microsoft 'win' the OS competition? How many DOS competitors were there in 1981?

Again, I strongly recommend you at least try to learn some basic principles of economics.

The gigantic real estate control fraud is not free markets, considering that the players in the market took what was given to them by government policies

I'm unclear what the 'market took' when the role of government in this debacle entirely consisted of previous laws being abrogated (Glass Steagall) and regulation being dialed back (SEC budget cuts and Greenspan-ian 'market self regulation').

I think you have a cynical view of individuals. Sure lots of individuals are corrupt but do you really think the people in government are also not as corrupt? I assume from your writings that you think these benevolent individuals in the government are also not as corrupt as any business owner.

Actually I think the vast majority of people are basically fair. However, in any organization there are huge incentives for the least scrupulous to rise.

The difference between government and industry, however, is that government isn't about profit.

A government employee may be lazy, he may be close minded, he may be a paper pusher or bean counter, but he isn't trying to squeeze the last dollar out of you.

This is a fundamental difference.

Politicians which bridge this gap - i.e. focus on money rather than function - are the problem.

US investment increases productivity? Do you mean to say federal spending improves education and infrastructure?

Yes. Unqualified Yes.

Compare US investment with say, Mexico's investment. US infrastructure with Mexico's infrastructure. US education with Mexico's education.

Certainly all these areas in the US could be improved, but let's not lose sight of the fact that it could be a lot worse.

The 'free market', as the libertarians keep blindly pronouncing, is what is driving up the cost of education, health care, housing, and so on and so forth.

I actually think the free market is overall a good thing, but as with everything, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing.

And we're at that stage now.

[mikedev10]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

The 'free market', as the libertarians keep blindly pronouncing, is what is driving up the cost of education, health care, housing, and so on and so forth.

I actually think the free market is overall a good thing, but as with everything, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing.

And we're at that stage now.

c1ue, i don't understand how you can blame these things on the libertarian view of a free market (while none of them appear to be)

education - and i'll assume we're talking about college here - my understanding is that student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, and that they are also 100% guaranteed by the federal government. i do not even understand how sallie mae can lose money under that system. rather than lend to much like housing and get bailed out, they seem like they are incented to never worry about lending too much because they have a built in perpetual bailout. what does any of this system have to do with what a libertarian believes is a free market though?

health care - the price discovery mechanism is broken, people don't use health insurance as a catastrophic risk mitigation device - they use it for that and as a prepaid service and use it differently because it is tied to employers rather than themselves, a tie apparently made as the result of ww2 wage free tax exemptions passed to allow companies to compete for talented labor via benefits. this still doesn't sound all that free markety to me?

housing - weren't ultra low interest rates for an ultra long time the result of the choice of men, not of markets?

[jiimbergin]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

c1ue, i don't understand how you can blame these things on the libertarian view of a free market (while none of them appear to be)

education - and i'll assume we're talking about college here - my understanding is that student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, and that they are also 100% guaranteed by the federal government. i do not even understand how sallie mae can lose money under that system. rather than lend to much like housing and get bailed out, they seem like they are incented to never worry about lending too much because they have a built in perpetual bailout. what does any of this system have to do with what a libertarian believes is a free market though?

health care - the price discovery mechanism is broken, people don't use health insurance as a catastrophic risk mitigation device - they use it for that and as a prepaid service and use it differently because it is tied to employers rather than themselves, a tie apparently made as the result of ww2 wage free tax exemptions passed to allow companies to compete for talented labor via benefits. this still doesn't sound all that free markety to me?

housing - weren't ultra low interest rates for an ultra long time the result of the choice of men, not of markets?

+1

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Well written SamAdams. My reply earlier was off cuff but yours was well thought out. I congratulate you. +1

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Mike, clue has an agenda. You can see it in his writing.

Thus the reason why he continues to say that I need to understand economics 101. Part of the problem that he doesn't understand is that a lot of basic economic principles are false. Take for example the idea promoted by markowitz and his Modern Portfolio Theory. Or Efficient Market Hypothesis that so many people in the financial world adhere to.

I belive it was Warren Buffett (someone he probably adores) who said "if the market was efficient I would be on the corner selling pencils out of a tin cup"

Cllue also probably believes in asset diversification and buy and hold (hope).

If you trust basic economics than you would not understand how prices of goods continue to rise when not supported by ever higher demand.

I thought part of this website was to break the idea of traditional economic principles?

One of the main problems with the world is our fundamental misunderstanding of risk and how it is priced. Clue probably believes in Value-at-risk models and all other financial models.

You cannot quantify a non-linear system like political-economics the same as you can quantify linear systems like mathematics or physics.

Clue doesnt understand this.

As I have said, Clue doesnt have a Clue.

There is a reason why he picked Clue as his name because he was the character in Tron who tried to take over and control the system to make it "perfect" or his idea of perfection aka Clue. Clue is akin to the actors in modern government in Tron.

[charliebrown]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Just wait until you have some serious medical issues and need to find out if the procedure will be paid for or not.
Even though I consider myself the "employer" of both the hospital, and insurance company. The insurance company will not tell you if a 10k test will be covered or not, until they get the bill. Nice hah? This is a level of opaqueness that is not acceptable.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2011/...ontrunner.html

Ron Paul Is Now the Republican Frontrunner

Posted on December 19, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog

Ron Paul Pulls Into the Lead


The Atlantic notes:

A new poll from Public Policy Polling shows that Ron Paul has taken the lead in the Iowa caucus race, while Newt Gingrich’s support is fading fast. A different Gallup poll shows Gringrich still holding the lead, but slipping, while The New York Times has Paul in the lead as well.
Gingrich has seen his numbers in the PPP poll drop from 27 percent to 14 percent in just three weeks, while his favorability rating is now split at 46 percent for to 47 percent against, the worst of any candidate not named Jon Huntsman.
***
Perhaps the most telling secondary question was, “Do you think Newt Gingrich has strong principles?” Only 36 percent say that he does, but for Paul that number was 73 percent.

Why is Mr. Paul so popular?
As I pointed out in September, Americans overwhelmingly want:

• The Federal Reserve to be reined in if not abolished

• The never-ending, open-ended, goalpost-moving wars to stop and the troops to be brought home

• Our liberties to be restored, and the martial law indefinite detention idiocy to be reversed

Paul has consistently championed these three American wishes for three decades. None of the other Republican (or Democratic) candidates are on the right side of history on any of these issues.

[ProdigyofZen]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Jim, I have been preaching for Paul to be president since the last campaign in 08. Interestingly last night I had dinner with a friend who is an analyst at a rather large L/S equity Hedge Fund and he stated to me that Paul has no idea about economics and is ignorant to it.

He said "what Paul is proposing is what the US did during the depression which prolonged it etc etc"

[Raz]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

c1ue, i don't understand how you can blame these things on the libertarian view of a free market (while none of them appear to be)

education - and i'll assume we're talking about college here - my understanding is that student loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, and that they are also 100% guaranteed by the federal government. i do not even understand how sallie mae can lose money under that system. rather than lend to much like housing and get bailed out, they seem like they are incented to never worry about lending too much because they have a built in perpetual bailout. what does any of this system have to do with what a libertarian believes is a free market though?

health care - the price discovery mechanism is broken, people don't use health insurance as a catastrophic risk mitigation device - they use it for that and as a prepaid service and use it differently because it is tied to employers rather than themselves, a tie apparently made as the result of ww2 wage free tax exemptions passed to allow companies to compete for talented labor via benefits. this still doesn't sound all that free markety to me?

housing - weren't ultra low interest rates for an ultra long time the result of the choice of men, not of markets?

I have real respect for you, c1ue, but I find myself in agreement with mikedev10 here.

[jiimbergin]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Jim, I have been preaching for Paul to be president since the last campaign in 08. Interestingly last night I had dinner with a friend who is an analyst at a rather large L/S equity Hedge Fund and he stated to me that Paul has no idea about economics and is ignorant to it.

He said "what Paul is proposing is what the US did during the depression which prolonged it etc etc"

I have always like much of what he said, but in 2008 I was on the wrong side of the war issue, but no longer.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

and where's dcarrigg been hiding lately?

Been holed up with a broken leg and surgery. Just got switched from the heavy stuff to lighter painkillers, and I feel as though I can think again.

Anyhow - for the topic at hand - Ron Paul is showing a slow but steady climb in Iowa and NH. I actually think that he could take Iowa. Latest polls show him out front (statistical heat with Romney). Caucuses never translate too well from polls, but he has got a good ground game too.

He's further behind in NH, but he's polling in 2nd there lately. Polls translate better in NH. If he keeps a slow, steady climb and takes Iowa, NH could be his (even if he comes in close second). By that time, the news will have to figure out what to do with him, and his national polls may start rising. He also has the second most money after Romney.

So far as the ad goes - and this is addressed to the RP fans out there - you got free publicity on Conan. For what it's worth, here's my advice. It's not a bad thing, and as he becomes a more serious contender, expect more of this. They will go for the "crazy uncle ron" angle. They may even try to Goldwater him. Just realize that. Don't get angry and passive-agressive. Have reasonable responses. Don't just pop in with the libertarian groupthink free-market worship. Don't get too confrontational with people over it. Win them over. Explain your point of view. RP supporters often get rabid. It's a turn-off for a lot of folks, myself included.

Ultimately, there were Government policies at fault AND private sector lies, screw-ups and insanity at fault for the crisis in which we find ourselves. Those who blame only the government would do well do google Daniel Sadek. The FIRE sector may be enabled by government, but it found plenty of quasi-legal ways to ruin the economy all on its own. Stripping regulation from finance will not fix it. It's akin to removing a gauze pad from a gushing wound.

I have catelogued what I find wrong with RP candidacy before. Here's the key excerpt:

1. Cutting $1T all of the sudden would almost certainly throw us into an official recession.
2. Lowering corporate taxes when they already pay less than 0 is galling.
3. Abolishing the estate tax creates dynasties.
4. Ending capital gains taxes lets Wall Street win more than they already have.
5. Throwing a quarter-million federal employees into the unemployment lines right off the bat would be bad.
6. Ending all environmental regulation invites problems - as does ending the National Park Service.
7. Letting companies 'repatriate income' tax free so that they can pay out higher executive compensation packages (which is what happened last time) doesn't make any sense.
8. Repealing Sarbanes-Oxley rather than working to fix it invites future Enrons, Tycos, Worldcoms, Healthsouths, etc.
9. Ending Dodd-Frank without replacing it with anything will let the banks win - until they fall apart again (even without the Fed and even more than they are already winning).
10. I like Social Security and I believe that it is not doomed (they've been crying insolvent since 1980 because they want all of the money in the wall st. casino - stocks).

I would add lots of small things to the list above - many of which are technical and scientific. Ending NOAA means no weather satellites, ending NIST means no particle accelerator regulation, ending DOE means no more los alamos, fermilab, oak ridge etc. etc.

I guess, in truth, it seems to me that things at the .gov level should work counter-cyclically. Austerity in the good times, spending in the bad (particularly on personnel). This is why an idea like general revenue sharing was good. It was meant to be counter-cyclical.

I also believe that the middle class is hurting. Policies that encourage manufacturing and the real economy should be fostered. Policies that encourage FIRE should be tempered. Policies that help the middle class should be put forth. Policies that reward the modern 'bonus army' of FIRE rentiers should be tempered. I don't find this on RP's agenda.

In any event, I don't discount RPs candidacy still. After Romney he has the most money and after Romney he polls best against Obama in the general election. There are two big drivers of Government spending, namely war and healthcare, and he proposes to do something about one of them. His spending plans will be dead on arrival in congress (much as Obama's have been post stimulus), but I do think that there is enough of an undercurrent of discontent that his ideas are not as outside the mainstream as they are often portrayed. This is apparent in his poll numbers.

But everyone should remember that Obama will be running on having lowered the unemployment figure. This will happen in January when the 99ers are booted off the roles. Remember around this time in 2010 when he extended the Bush tax cuts to ostensibly to continue extended unemployment benefits? Notice how he's not pushing it so hard this time? That U3 number will be down, even though more folks will be out of work. It's too complicated to explain in a soundbite. It will be tough to run against. And Obama has more money than the rest of them combined and then some.

RP is one of the few candidates who truly believes in his philosophy and policies. I will give him that. I have always taken him seriously. Polls are showing now that it was wise to have done so. And I don't have an alternative candidate. But he's not for me either. And that's my take, anyhow, for what it's worth.

[astonas]

Re: Conan Parodies Ron Paul Ad

Welcome Back, dcarrigg, and here's hoping for a good recovery!

Don't get angry and passive-agressive. Have reasonable responses. Don't just pop in with the libertarian groupthink free-market worship. Don't get too confrontational with people over it. Win them over. Explain your point of view. RP supporters often get rabid. It's a turn-off for a lot of folks, myself included.

+1

It's so easy for an abundance of passion to help one achieve the exact opposite of what one wants.

If one supports RP, the best thing one can do is NOT rant. The people who might respond to that are already on Paul's side, and those that remain to be convinced will be repelled.

A dispassionate discussion also helps Paul in another way. Whether he wins or loses, he still may win in the sense of influencing the debate with his ideas. In fact, it is hard to imagine a more fertile ground for them than this election cycle, when headlines of government corruption and inside-dealing abound. If his supporters are seen as rabid, then a loss on his part will cause his ideas to be dismissed along with his candidacy. Hence the "crazy uncle ron" meme in the media. If he and his supporters are seen as supremely rational, then regardless of the actual electoral results, his ideas win. Future candidates will all have a new voting block in their constituency, which they will explicitly woo, centered around his thoughts.