"Occupy" Protests

stonebeard wrote: Also, this post in the Lamest Topic/Poll (whatever) thread: Slartibartfast wrote: Poke them a little and they reveal themselves to be right wing republicans and not libertarian at all. That represents a complete lack of understanding on: 1) anyone who actually calls himself a libertarian in any of the threads we have ever had on politics or economics 2) the actual spectrum on which ideologies can exist (hint: it's more than Democrat and Republican)

Well, the issue here is that we all have our opinions on the answers to the problems facing our country, but to turn every post into a dissertation on political science or macro-economics (including nitpicking the finer points between right-leaning libertarians and conservatives) is a bit pompous, don't you think?  Just because we have political ideas and may even be active in politics doesn't mean that we spend hours pouring over political or economic texts for fun.    I work and also have much better things to do with my time. 


Edited by The Doctor - November 29 2011 at 21:41

"A politician is not as narrow-minded as he forces himself to be." Will Rogers

I give you exhibit A:

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Unfortunately you tried to argue libertarian or neo-con as a false dichotomy. Your statement is true, but it's misleading. Nobody ever argued that point with you.

Exhibit A of your inability to remember or understand our discussion?

Politics is applesauce..........Will Rogers

stonebeard wrote: Slartibartfast wrote: The political spectrum isn't simple Then why do you think libertarians here are right wing republicans? Y'all may not be perfect right wing republicans but you seem to share a lot of the ideas. Slartibartfast wrote: don't arrogantly presume that you are all wise and all knowing about it.  I'm not, but I am stating that you come across as a person who does not want to acknowledge ideology past the little (D) or (R) after a pundits name on the television.  Not paying attention, kind of sad.

At some point I really get the impression I am responding to some asinine computer program.  The D and R are the only choices we're given in major elections.  Sure we had Ross Perot and John Anderson once upon a time.  They aren't given the (D) or (R) after the pundits name on the television screen.  You sometimes don't even get that after the elected politician's name accurately if you watch on Fox News.  The democrats are more on the side of the average people, it may be marginal but the lesser of two evils is still less evil.  Even the d's aren't a uniform, group, there are plenty who are on the right side.  But that's doesn't take away those who are.

Anyway, I'm hoping for third party candidates to Romney when he wins the nomination...

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Exhibit A of your inability to remember or understand our discussion?

What was the middle part?


Edited by Slartibartfast - November 29 2011 at 22:49

Ah! Guys cmon gunna let Slart troll ya like that?  Especially  Drewbeard of all people :(


Either that or you realize it but are plowing along seriously because your hatred of government has consumed a sense of humor :( :(

Not saying it was good humor at all but I also think we know Slart by this point.

Cmon gents, he's not that good at trolling!
Bad Slart *wags finger*


Edited by JJLehto - November 30 2011 at 01:45

How many standard deviations from the mean does a thread have to be to become libertarian?

The Doctor wrote: People are not paid based on the amount of work they do in the private sector either.  I would strongly dispute that a CEO does 475 times more work than a janitor, yet that is what he often makes.  I would say, if that were the case, the janitor should probably make more than the CEO.  And the people who actually produce products (the laborers) should be the highest paid in the company.

Partially it makes sense that a CEO gets paid more than a janitor, though, because (In theory, anyway...) a CEO should have special training, skillsets, and intelligence that make him or her a good CEO, whereas a lot more people could be good janitors without any training or rare skills.

Just like not everyone could just walk in off the street and teach my English classes the way they're supposed to be taught, but most people could pick up a broom and do a decent job sweeping off the floors.

The T wrote: Obviously, you mistook my post for a serious one.

No, but it was a good chance to whine about senators getting paid more than me.