Re: Silence on the right

"Les Cargill" <lNOcargill@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:YhzRg.8305$K02.4429@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Trucker wrote:
"Les Cargill" <lNOcargill@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ZS4Rg.7042$K02.579@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Nospam wrote:


Les Cargill wrote:



Government debt rolls over effectively forever,


If at least the interest can be payed on due date. But what if a nasty
situation arise where you are not even able to pay that
much ?


The first rule of cartoon physics is "Don't look down."


IOW, don't look at reality.



That debt amounts to a gesture of faith in the state
of the art in American/internationalist capitalism. The
present interest rates act as a vote of confidence in them.

A vote of confidence in the ability of the Republicans to continue
raping our own citizens and the rest of the world.

It can be paid in terms of additional debt, if need be. It';s
denominated in aircraft carriers, after all.


Yes. You WILL use these dollars to trade oil and if you do not
we WILL make up some religious horse*** excuse to bomb you.



TO be sure, I think it's a *major* tactical
error for the Bush administration to be as close
mouthed as they have been, but you are on
your own to dig through interviews with the likes
of Paul Wolfowitz to determine why.

The one thing the Neocons got right is: you are
either for constitutional rule of law, or you are not.


This last statement is totally out to lunch. You are either very
confused as to what is currently thought of when the word
"neocon" is used or you are totally wrong in claiming some
sort of support from these people for constitutional law,
or you have a very strange definition for the word "right".
It may be that all of these distortions are part of your
makeup.

depending on growth to shrink the proportion of GDP it represents.


Or increase if the economy collapse.


Seriously? "so far, so good...".


Yes. We march inexorably toward the Republican heaven where the
only function of government is to collect interest on the debt from the
United States producing class and give this money to the wealthy class.
And, yes, it will tale a very strong military (and homeland security) to
keep this slavery system in place.





Yet the evidence of WMDs continues to pile up. Yet the map
of the counter-motives of Hans Blix and other Euro folks
to actually find them continues to be refined.

The notion that the particular WMD's which everyone agreed MIGHT
in the hands of Saddam Hussein made him a treat to anyone other than
his own people is total horsecrap and always has been. And the idea that
"terrorists" are going to ride their camels through the capitol building
and displace our form of government is equally rubbish. And all of this
is the backbone of the fraud being perpetrated on the American
middle class in order to achieve a Republican nirvana where the nobility
totally controls the masses and democracy is buried in the prancing
pig *** of continuing "war".

No, really... the limiting metric WART this sort of debt is
the interest rate. What will really happen is that the rates will be adjusted
to create demand for the instruments. Actually,
should those instruments become supremely Boring, then
the only problem left is to figure out how to apply the untapped productive
capacity in the US towards serving those markets. Nice
problem to have.


IOW, how do we force the labor of the children along with the
labor of the adults.


Those do not represent labor.

Labor is the effort of humans.

So, what is *your* proscription for
bootstrapping a productive industrial base in , say China?

What makes you think that I am overly concerned with the success
of the Red Chinese or the India Indians or anyone else when it
costs me my standard of living? I have humanitarian aspirations
as do all honest and caring persons. I have religious leanings toward
the ascent of the entire species as defining righteousness. But I
do not credit any sort of trickle down tax break Republican
thievery as being necessary to the increased standards of living
in China or India or anywhere else. If all investment income is
taxed equally or all assets are taxed equally then investments
will still flow to the area of least labor costs. We need not
shelter the rent income being realized in the USA and we need
not totally abandon tariffs to have these things happen.

You'd
prefer the sort that Empire Britain used - leading
to the Boxer Rebellion?

I think I have made myself pretty clear on what sort of "aid"
I am willing to stand for.

Those instruments do not represent labor *at all*. We continue
to prove this. And never mind that this process
was well underway during the Clinton Administration... after
all, where exactly is WalMart headquarters? Oh yes - it's in
Arkansas, isn't it?

And now you are twirling around in the middle of the room
not tethered to any reality whatsoever. A very progressive income
tax and minimal import duties are in order. The income
tax will hasten the investment of other nations in their own
countries and in ours and it can be used to alleviate the
problem offshore investment by our own people is having
on the producing sector of our own economy.


But even more seriously - SFAIK, other than say, greenmailers or
Buffet, or hard money people - nobody serious ever goes short on America.


There are more than a few who will be leaving this country to you
and your jack booted Republican pals. Other nations will welcome
the intelligent people. You can stay here with the morons.



Them ain't my pals. Using that false analogy, that puts you in with
the Green party or some other inadequate mechanism. I, at least,
know better than to resort to *that* level of comedy.

I've never registered as anything but Democrat or Libertarian,
dependent on who was available to vote for. I've just
done the legwork to disentangle their convoluted
position. And I cannot tell you how utterly disgusting
the performance of *both* parties is. They refuse to
do what is necessary to win, and we can only
shake our heads.

The neocons represent another failed experiment, one
that will yeild some sort of incremental improvement
whenever the right person can be found to improve on it.

It isn't the job of a PERSON. It is the job of all of us. And if
the Democratic Party was true to its namesake and was actually
about empowering the middle class by doubling the membership
of the House, then I would have a party to vote for. As it is,
you are minimally correct: I will vote Democratic because it is
the best I can do to remove the lying filth Republicans.

Consider this: Even the makers of IEDs in Iraq have faith in America, else
why would they? I wish this were jingoistic,
but it is simply... not. Phrases like "last best hope" come
to mind.


Les always degenerates into a form of poetry that does not
make any sense at all to any logical person.


Why, thanks on the phraseology compliment, but it's
hardly poetry. Now, here's a question for you: can
you seperate the present situation from the
long trend line of Western Civlization itself?

It will depend on what you are plotting.

Thought not. Guess it's imperfect, too.

Even if we grant that something like Georgism is
the superior form of taxation, I do not see how we
get there from here, so it's pointless to argue. The
roots of failure in the present administration go
back to Teddy Roosevelt. All administrations
make this stuff up as they go along; there are no
scrolls with perfect instructions on them.

That is why the seat of power in this nation is designed to be
the House of Representatives as opposed to the (P)resident.
It was a very good plan. But the House of Representatives
was hijacked by the TwoParty in 1911 when the membership
of the House by vote of the majority (party men all) set the
number of representatives at 435. The huge numbers of people
encompassed by the resulting large district (was 200K now
600K) has resulted in an inordinate amount of control by big
money and a lot less opportunity for good truthful people to
be elected to represent their neighbors.


If not, then what? Nobody even wants to *ask* that question.

That is the elephant in the room.



The "elephant" in the room is exactly the debt and the question
I have asked. I have yet to get anything but denial and
hyperbole.


You refuse to accept the (apparent) fact that government
debt is rather hazardous to retire in full. I qualify
with "apparent" because the data base for this conclusion
isn't by any stretch complete. Hence "so far, so good".

I mean, the present alternatives are *breathtaking* in
how well they illustrate the falseness of your position.

Fasten seat belt (and who the hell ever proposed retiring
the entire debt or even half of it????)

The Hugo Chavez kleptocracy will lead to the general populist
meltdown;

Lie number one.

Iran's Ahmadinejad will reinvent some tragic
Napoleonic/Stalinist disaster (assuming he does not end
up beheaded in the public square )

Totally off topic.

and the Populist
movement in the US will bury itself in well-earned
failure.

What "populist movement"?


And in closing it should be apparent that you have no idea what
my position might be and most certainly do not want anyone to be
able to ascertain my position(s) on all of these matters.

--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org


.

Loading