Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI don't know the individual, but do you think that this is an essential, or even desirable experience for a presidential candidate?
As I read much of Klein's analysis, I couldn't help but think of the rise of U.S. Senator Barack Obama. Here is a man being touted for the presidency and he's never even run a business, nor does he understand the most fundamental aspects of markets.
Surely there is more to the post than this - an understanding of foreign affairs (a fundamental knowledge of geography would be a start), an understanding of the law etc etc must all be more important.
Originally posted by spruce112358Friedman? FRIEDMAN?
Why do you say this is an anti-intellectual tirade?
I don't say I agree with all of it -- certainly suggesting that left-leaning intellectuals flock to universities because they can't succeed in business is a bit simplistic -- but it's not bad. Certainly it is not spreading 'hate and calumny'.
The best (only?) economic book I've read is "Free to Choose" by Milton Friedman who just died the other day.
The guy who railed against big government and the NEW DEAL yet fed from the public trough at university institutions for most of his life? That Friedman?
Originally posted by uzlessProbably. I guess one of the few conservatives wallowing at the public trough.
Friedman? FRIEDMAN?
The guy who railed against big government and the NEW DEAL yet fed from the public trough at university institutions for most of his life? That Friedman?
His thesis was that government regulation, although almost always well-intentioned, usually makes whatever you are trying to get more expensive.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterDid FD Roosevelt?
As I read much of Klein's analysis, I couldn't help but think of the rise of U.S. Senator Barack Obama. Here is a man being touted for the presidency and he's never even run a business, nor does he understand the most fundamental aspects of markets.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterBush ran a few businesses - into the ground - and struggles with the fundamentals of walking upright ... you must feel embarrassed that he is president?
As I read much of Klein's analysis, I couldn't help but think of the rise of U.S. Senator Barack Obama. Here is a man being touted for the presidency and he's never even run a business, nor does he understand the most fundamental aspects of markets.
The post that was quoted here has been removedwho are you talking about? Pelosi, Kennedy, Schumer, Kerry, Reid? ROTFLMAO. Maybe something will get done with the Moderate Dems and Reps but with the afore mentioned group all I see is more BS. They still don't have an agenda and as far as I'm concerned it's Same *hit different day.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThis guy is a teacher? 😕
According to economics teacher Peter Klein, it has to do with selection bias, the expansion of the welfare state and World War II. Moreover, he believes there is still hope that one day the Lilliputians will be thwarted and returned to their rightful role as teachers and observers:
http://www.mises.org/story/2318
Originally posted by royalchickenAbout "Free to Choose". Really a nice read:
Do you have any historical basis for this at all?
"The Friedmans advocate laissez faire economic policies, often criticizing interventionist government policies in the United States and abroad, and their cost in personal freedoms and economic efficiency. Areas of focus include government taxation on gas and tobacco, government regulation of the public school systems, and the Federal Reserve's role in exacerbating the Great Depression by reducing the money supply in the years leading up to it. On the subject of welfare, the Friedmans argue that current welfare practices are creating "wards of the state", as opposed to "self-reliant individuals", and suggest a negative income tax as a less harmful alternative. Other ideas covered are: decriminalization of drugs, tighter control of Fed money supply, and the repeal of laws favoring unions."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_to_Choose
And this is a neat idea as well:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax
Originally posted by spruce112358Listen, Friedman is like Freud. Not many still subcribe to his theory in practice anymore. For all his ramblings about how governments should get smaller and Depression economics the guy was a hypocrite....
Areas of focus include government taxation on gas and tobacco, government regulation of the public school systems, [b]and the Federal Reserve's role in exacerbating the Great Depression by reducing the money supply in the years leading up to it. On the subject of welfare, the Friedmans argue that current welfare practices are creating "wards of ...[text shortened]... reliant individuals", and suggest a negative income tax as a less harmful alternative.
[/b]
"unable to find work during the Depression, he regarded the job he secured with one of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal agencies "a lifesaver."
Here's an objective viewpoint from a Canadian newspaper obit.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&call_pageid=971358637177&c=Article&cid=1163717412124