http://z6.invisionfree.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/index.php?showtopic=182
__________________________________________________
From http://z6.invisionfree.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/index.php?showtopic=188
Something along the lines of FDR's New Deal, or Obama's economic stumulus would work to restore an economy if the money was issued instead of borrowed The reason why the US economy still sucked until WWII is because FDR tried to finance his recovery by borrowing the money, and the economy crashed again from interest payments and the Fed's open market operations. Periods of economic depressions are essentially 'money famines' and the solution is straightforward in theory but politically difficult.
I believe the article is correct in advocating 'Keynes without debt' as solutions to economic depressions. Public works projects such as highways and railways are highly effective at putting people to work, and also provide economic benefits once they're completed. Even paying people to build a pyramid in the middle of nowhere would solve the 'money famine', along with spending on armaments, which is essentially the same thing except it has geostrategic purposes.
My main point of disagreement with the article is its rhetoric about Adam Smith and 'free market capitalism'. Adam Smith's 'invisible hand' works very well when it comes to industrial capitalism; but not with financial capitalism. By industrial capitalism I refer to Henry Ford's method of business - to produce better goods, for lower prices while paying higher wages. With businesses competing to produce better and cheaper cars, the end result is everyone in society was better off - having access to affordable cars, high wages, and Ford himself made lots of money.
However, it fails with financial capitalism. Financial institutions like banks don't produce 'real' wealth; they produce debt. By following Smith's invisible hand they're working in an industry that strives to increase society's debt burden and ultimately leave everyone worse off. It's the same deal with society's 'vices' like addictive substances and gambling.
-david
__________________________
I trust that like me, no one here actually likes or trusts government. However, because government is not going away any time soon, and that government is the only tool we have that is able to effectively combat the multi-faceted wealthy elite/complicit government/corporate giantism network that keeps real reform from happening....how do we reach those who might otherwise be four square with us, but their cynical mistrust and even hatred of government prevents them from considering things like sovereign control of the currency, curtailing corporate dominance etc. ? I believe that better government is smaller and more decentralized government. Counter intuitively, however, I believe that activist government is the only way that decentralized government is likely to happen. Starving the beast as libertarians are fond of advocating looks more like laying prostrate before the behemoth of domestic and multi-national corporations whose lobbying influence is already the primary reason for government complicity in our situation, and expecting them to be benevolent and understanding. IMO it will only make their triumph a fait acompli. Personally, I think that the such rabid anti-government sentiment is a fall back strategy for the Banking Lobby to thwart real reform even when the situation is so bad that their reputations and control are in danger.
-BenFranklinwas right
____________
I could not have said this better, and, in fact, this will be the topic of the Still Report, SR 11 -- however, I just can't resist conversing with Dr. Franklin.Government is certainly not perfect, but one million Americans have given their lives to protect and defend this great experiment in self-governance -- the most freedom-promoting experiment in human history.Plutocracy has always hated democracy. Democracy, by necessity, takes power -- and money -- from plutocracy. It is therefore in the interest of plutocracy to do whatever it can to corrupt democracy and then, through its wholly-owned media, publicize its deficiencies.
-Bill Still
http://z6.invisionfree.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/index.php?showtopic=156
__________
http://z6.invisionfree.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/index.php?showtopic=164
I noticed your opinion of Julius Caesar changed since Money Masters 1. Whether Julius Caesar championed the common man or was a tyrant is still debated by historians to this day.A few hundred years before the days of Caesar, Plato wrote about oligarchy, democracy and tyranny, and how a 'champion of the people' against an oligarchy would eventually consolidate power for himself and become a tyrant. I wrote about these here in the
threadhttp://z6.invisionfree.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/index.php?showtopic=85
QUOTE
Plato - Oligarchy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyLvHlzoTN0Plato - Democracy - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-utBXOgeLQ
Plato - Tyranny - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcN0x0RFkkw
Plato & Socrates - how does the champion of the people become a tyrant?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PagRWmWsUxA
These are certainly worth watching; I found them surprisingly relevant 2,300 years later; and especially with the politics of the interwar period.Although I agree with your general idea in the Still Report; you seem to be confusing oligarchy with tyranny at times. Oligarchs or plutocrats, (or kleptocrats as they probably should be called with reference to today's bankers) usually don't 'get things done' or 'make the trains run on time'. Quite the opposite; they force governments to benefit the oligarchic group at the expense of the national interest and the people generally. Things tend to grow very corrupt and slow and void of common sense under oligarchies, just as is happening today.The difference between an oligarchy/plutocracy and tyranny is in the former, power is concentrated in an elite group of people, whereas in the latter it's held by a single man. I view the struggle of political power as a three-way struggle rather than a two-way struggle - between democrats, oligarchs, and tyrants.
__________________________
Philippe Reply (to a Pro-abortion extremist):March 22nd, 2010 at 8:29 am
Right “No”, you’re not a racist, you just want to keep on killing them brown people. With that kind of logic, or lack thereof, you would make a good lawyer if you had some intelligence to back it up. You claim to be antiwar, yet are perfectly content with killing babies? What sort of twisted planet do you live on where that even remotely makes sense? It sounds like you don’t really think through your world view because if you did, you’d realize how completely ridiculous you’d appear for being so openly contrary.
I call you a racist because you now have proof it is brown people mostly dying and seldom for rape, and yet you don’t care. You know the primary purpose is for eugenics, not for women’s rights. You just have some MSM talking point you picked up and you’re riding it into the sunset.
I’m not even going to mention my kids, you’d just want to kill them too. Go ahead, keep on believing Congress has valid reasons for suffering of women and drink your kool aide. Playing right into that idiotic right vs left paradigm very well.
_________________________
savedman Says: March 22nd, 2010 at 7:58 am
While abortion is murder of an innocent human being in God’s sight, it isn’t the only gross sin of America. All this attention on abortion as being horrible by the catholics is merely a smokescreen to cover up their real sins. Who would believe that the leadership of the catholic church is genuinely concerned with the unborn, because when given the chance to change policy by the catholic politicians, it only gets worse. We have 6 out of 9 catholic supreme court justices, and hundreds of house and senate members. Tell me my friend, why are we about to be paying for abortion on demand with federal dollars? Remember the ratio of catholics in politics, they are liars! The pope covered up child molestors when if he was a real Christian, would have kicked them out of his church. The pope says that he and his church will execute the due penalty on their child molestors. If they were protestant child molestors, they would go before the civil law court, but not so with the catholics. It’s the same as the terrorists being tried in civil court instead of a miltary tribunal. The devil is protecting his wicked perverted boys and girls. Sinner friend, don’t go to hell with these bunch of perverts, Repent of your sins and Receive the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour by FAITH. Romans 10:9-13; Ephesians 2:8,9
Proverbs Reply:March 22nd, 2010 at 8:36 am
And pasionately supporting abortion and being anti war doesn’t make you a hypocrite? LOL!!! I love these boards, full of all sorts of fools.
“A fool takes no pleasure in understanding, but only in expressing his opinion. ”
Proverbs 18:2
Reply
http://z6.invisionfree.com/Bill_Still_Reforum/index.php?showtopic=164
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.400
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=105934.400
No comments:
Post a Comment