Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

What political topics matter most?

FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 1:29:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
War, civil liberties and discrimination are really the only things I care about. I talk about economics a lot but I have no real agenda.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 2:59:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I personally feel like economics is one of the most important, followed closely by religion in politics.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 2:59:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
For me, it's sort of just a blanket "role of government," be it in markets or in personal lives.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:02:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 1:29:54 PM, FREEDO wrote:
War, civil liberties and discrimination are really the only things I care about. I talk about economics a lot but I have no real agenda.

I should think that civil liberties and discrimination fall rather under the same penumbra, however broad.

Curiously enough, save economics, those are among my most important as well.
Tsar of DDO
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYW
Posts: 36,287
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:03:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Why is it that you'd rather the United States adopt a non-interventionalist foreign policy paradigm?
Tsar of DDO
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:08:32 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 3:03:18 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Why is it that you'd rather the United States adopt a non-interventionalist foreign policy paradigm?

Because wars and bombings only breed resentment, is expensive, and takes money out of the hands of the people, preventing personal economic growth, foreign aid is expensive and one-sided, and free trade improves competition, entrepreneurship, quality, costs, etc. while also disincentivizing war.

Well, that's the short version.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:09:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?

No war for anything other than defense, and reducing foreign aid drastically.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 3:10:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 3:08:32 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:03:18 PM, YYW wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Why is it that you'd rather the United States adopt a non-interventionalist foreign policy paradigm?

Because wars and bombings only breed resentment, is expensive, and takes money out of the hands of the people, preventing personal economic growth, foreign aid is expensive and one-sided, and free trade improves competition, entrepreneurship, quality, costs, etc. while also disincentivizing war.

Well, that's the short version.

That being said, my foreign policy views are among my more malleable views.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:03:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 3:09:15 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?

No war for anything other than defense, and reducing foreign aid drastically.

Are you aware that we as a nation already tried this policy in the past, and that it did not work?
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:22:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:03:53 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:09:15 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?

No war for anything other than defense, and reducing foreign aid drastically.

Are you aware that we as a nation already tried this policy in the past, and that it did not work?

Well, we've never had completely free international trade, so no, I'm not aware of this.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:24:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:22:24 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:03:53 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:09:15 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?

No war for anything other than defense, and reducing foreign aid drastically.

Are you aware that we as a nation already tried this policy in the past, and that it did not work?

Well, we've never had completely free international trade, so no, I'm not aware of this.

I might be wrong about the free trade thing, but what you describe sounds a lot like the wilson era foreign policy.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ClassicRobert
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:28:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:24:17 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:22:24 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:03:53 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:09:15 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?

No war for anything other than defense, and reducing foreign aid drastically.

Are you aware that we as a nation already tried this policy in the past, and that it did not work?

Well, we've never had completely free international trade, so no, I'm not aware of this.

I might be wrong about the free trade thing, but what you describe sounds a lot like the wilson era foreign policy.

Yeah, in that time we had ridiculous barriers to international trade. I'm not advocating isolationism, just non-interventionist foreign policy.
Debate me: Economic decision theory should be adjusted to include higher-order preferences for non-normative purposes http://www.debate.org...

Do you really believe that? Or not? If you believe it, you should man up and defend it in a debate. -RoyLatham

My Pet Fish is such a Douche- NiamC

It's an app to meet friends and stuff, sort of like an adult club penguin- Thett3, describing Tinder
PotBelliedGeek
Posts: 4,298
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 4:53:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:28:07 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:24:17 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:22:24 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 4:03:53 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:09:15 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:03:07 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
At 1/6/2014 3:00:34 PM, ClassicRobert wrote:
International, I'd rather just be non-interventionist while opening up the international markets.

Can you explain what you mean by "non-interventionist"?

No war for anything other than defense, and reducing foreign aid drastically.

Are you aware that we as a nation already tried this policy in the past, and that it did not work?

Well, we've never had completely free international trade, so no, I'm not aware of this.

I might be wrong about the free trade thing, but what you describe sounds a lot like the wilson era foreign policy.

Yeah, in that time we had ridiculous barriers to international trade. I'm not advocating isolationism, just non-interventionist foreign policy.

Ok, I see. I personally see U.S., or more specifically U.N intervention as a major peacekeeping force.
Religion Forum Ambassador

HUFFLEPUFF FOR LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!
ironmaiden
Posts: 456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 6:03:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:53:20 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
Ok, I see. I personally see U.S., or more specifically U.N intervention as a major peacekeeping force.

I wish that's how it was, and that's what I used to think, until I slowly began to realize that the US being the world's policeman only makes people hate us.

When another country's government is slaughtering its own people, and we have the ability to stop it, why shouldn't we? We should protect innocent people, right? On the other hand, that will get us no where. In the Middle East, for example, those innocent people would go on to build another regime we hate. Also, in the past, the US has only intervened in other countries' business merely to spread democracy or stop Communism. Those aren't valid reasons to start a war or get young American men killed.

While I wish we were the world's peacekeepers, I've only seen that generate resentment towards us. Instead of people thanking us, they criticize us. Because of this I think the US simply needs to keep to itself, militarily speaking. If we're attacked, it's on. If a close ally of ours is attacked, it's on. But if it's something we don't need to be involved in, we should keep our nose out of trouble.
"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being that his is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question. 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?"
ironmaiden
Posts: 456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/6/2014 6:09:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I would say the whole gun debate fires me up the most. Besides that, maybe the whole income "inequality" debate, I guess.
"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being that his is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question. 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?"
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 1:41:31 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 4:53:20 PM, PotBelliedGeek wrote:
I personally see U.S., or more specifically U.N intervention as a major peacekeeping force.

The U.N. rapes children.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

http://www.theguardian.com...

http://news.bbc.co.uk...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk...

http://www.prisonplanet.com... (Archived AP report)
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/6/2014 6:09:29 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
I would say the whole gun debate fires me up the most. Besides that, maybe the whole income "inequality" debate, I guess.

Why is income inequality important or relevant.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 3:32:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why is income inequality important or relevant.

Because wealth is the equivalent of political power. And income inequality is strongly correlated with an increase in various social ills, such as crime.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 3:43:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 3:32:06 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why is income inequality important or relevant.

Because wealth is the equivalent of political power. And income inequality is strongly correlated with an increase in various social ills, such as crime.

Thank you.
ironmaiden
Posts: 456
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 8:26:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/6/2014 6:09:29 PM, ironmaiden wrote:
I would say the whole gun debate fires me up the most. Besides that, maybe the whole income "inequality" debate, I guess.

Why is income inequality important or relevant.

How is it not?
"I know what you're thinking. 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But being that his is a .44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself a question. 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, do ya, punk?"
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 9:58:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 3:32:06 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why is income inequality important or relevant.

Because wealth is the equivalent of political power. And income inequality is strongly correlated with an increase in various social ills, such as crime.

That being said, the role of money in politics and elections is an issue, too... How much money you are able to spare for political purposes should have no bearing on how much your voice is worth.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 1:05:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 3:32:06 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why is income inequality important or relevant.

Because wealth is the equivalent of political power.

Prosperity is important, but that has nothing to do with inequality.

If wealth is the equivalent of political power then why did a party that represents the poor win the Presidency twice and Romney the rich guy lost in part because he was perceived as the rich guy who is out of touch?

Look at the John Galt capitalists of the world like the Koch Brothers. They have been losing for 35 years and have finally got a sliver of what they want in 2010 with the advent of the Tea Party but it's still nothing. Koch Bros want a Ron Paul paradise and have the opposite.

Look at Ross Perot, the man was a millionaire and still lost by landslide.

And income inequality is strongly correlated with an increase in various social ills, such as crime.

False. That would be poverty induced by a sluggish economy that stifles growth.

If I'm living prosperously making $150,000, why does it matter that there's a $50,000,000 dollar gap between me and Tom Cruise? That's income inequality for you and it means nothing except for those who enjoy coveting others.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/7/2014 4:28:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 1/7/2014 1:05:40 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 1/7/2014 3:32:06 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 1/7/2014 1:42:43 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Why is income inequality important or relevant.

Because wealth is the equivalent of political power.

Prosperity is important, but that has nothing to do with inequality.

If wealth is the equivalent of political power then why did a party that represents the poor win the Presidency twice and Romney the rich guy lost in part because he was perceived as the rich guy who is out of touch?

Look at the John Galt capitalists of the world like the Koch Brothers. They have been losing for 35 years and have finally got a sliver of what they want in 2010 with the advent of the Tea Party but it's still nothing. Koch Bros want a Ron Paul paradise and have the opposite.

Look at Ross Perot, the man was a millionaire and still lost by landslide.

I'm not exclusively talking about the ability to influence government, although that is half of it. And I'm a bit confused of that fact that you would deny that huge role it plays. It's impossible to over-look. Lobbying (aka bribing) is what runs the show in Washington. As a Libertarian, I would expect you to distance yourself from our style of crony capitalism.

The Koch Brothers are not Libertarians. Like many others, they use Libertarianism to advance their interests when it suites them, Meanwhile, they are very successful at lobbying for government programs that benefit themselves directly.

Many of the largest companies in the US receive more in subsides than they pay in taxes. While others are granted state-sanctioned monopoly.

The other half of the equation is simply that wealth gives you powerful economic leverage. The poorer you are, the harder it will be to rise out of it. Workers must sell much of their freedom to employers in order to survive. They can only overcome it by banning together collectively, which has proven to be very difficult, especially in the face of intimidation and propaganda from the ruling class.

The only reason the middle-class and small businesses exist at all is because there has been some level of redistribution. Which was not so much won by the working class, as it was given to them just to make them calm down and shut up. Without that redistribution, there would have been a revolution sometime in the 30s or 40s.

Property is a form of control sanctioned by society. The more you have, the more control you have. In a "Libertarian" society, you may not be able to control a person directly, but by controlling resources, you control them vicariously. That's why Left-Libertarians propose that more is needed for a truly free society. People are free when they can follow their dreams and live up to their full potential. In order for a strict Propertarian system to allow that, it would need to establish "perfect competition". And we all know that doesn't happen. You can theorize all you want, but all evidence is to the contrary. Equality opportunity is essential to being truly free. At least when we're talking politics.

And income inequality is strongly correlated with an increase in various social ills, such as crime.

False. That would be poverty induced by a sluggish economy that stifles growth.

[video]


If I'm living prosperously making $150,000, why does it matter that there's a $50,000,000 dollar gap between me and Tom Cruise? That's income inequality for you and it means nothing except for those who enjoy coveting others.

If you're really making $150,000 a year, that puts you in the top 1%. A majority of Americans live at near-poverty levels, while residing in one the richest countries on Earth.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord