What does a communist do In the midst of the disastrous obamacare rollout?

I'm not one to favor spending on wasting assets -- I drive an 18 year old truck paid for many years ago. I have no problem with assuming debt at historically low interest rates well below the actual inflation rate, to pay for long range investments. If fact the U.S. is making a mistake not to borrow more now to spend on education, infrastructure, and research. But cuts in spending on wasting assets and areas of great inefficiency, i.e., "defense", are always a good idea. If we borrow heavily now at negative real interest rates, our creditors will end up paying us to use their money!

There are still some lunatics around who think it is possible to maintain a commodity (gold) backed currency. But of course, that's no longer possible. Some of these same lunatics think governments should operate on a cash basis, and never borrow -- the same lunatics clamor for a balanced budget amendment. These folks will continue to be ignored, just as we ignore those who think dental fillings cause mental retardation. These nuts will always be with us, but fortunately they will always be a small minority.

I am not concerned about the size of government, I am concerned about its efficiency, quality, and non-incursion on personal liberty. I believe if you focus on these aspects of government you will automatically arrive at an appropriate size.
 
Quote from piezoe:

I'm not one to favor spending on wasting assets -- I drive an 18 year old truck paid for many years ago. I have no problem with assuming debt at historically low interest rates well below the actual inflation rate, to pay for long range investments. If fact the U.S. is making a mistake not to borrow more now to spend on education, infrastructure, and research. But cuts in spending on wasting assets and areas of great inefficiency, i.e., "defense", are always a good idea. If we borrow heavily now at negative real interest rates, our creditors will end up paying us to use their money!

There are still some lunatics around who think it is possible to maintain a commodity (gold) backed currency. But of course, that's no longer possible. Some of these same lunatics think governments should operate on a cash basis, and never borrow -- the same lunatics clamor for a balanced budget amendment. These folks will continue to be ignored, just as we ignore those who think dental fillings cause mental retardation. These nuts will always be with us, but fortunately they will always be a small minority.

I am not concerned about the size of government, I am concerned about its efficiency, quality, and non-incursion on personal liberty. I believe if you focus on these aspects of government you will automatically arrive at an appropriate size.
More...

Oy vey, where to start here. One, these "lunatics" as you call them don't want a gold standard, they want competing currencies. Let the dollar compete fairly in the open market place. That's it. Some, like Ron Paul even advocate to have the dollar tied to a "basket" of currencies. Not Gold.

Two, size of government unfortunately IS tied to efficiency. It's also tied to corruption and corporatism. The more powerful you make government, the more crooks you attract. Size is not robust. Or as Taleb would size, large behemoth governments are very fragile.

And the idea of borrowing more money now...really? Piezoe, you do understand, we have to pay this back at some point right? I mean, if we borrow more today, we are going to have outrageous tax hikes in the future. Or massive devaluation in our currency or both. This means you are going to sip the chalice that contains wine from the blood of your children. Why don't we ask them what they think about that.

It boggles my mind how anyone can use the term efficiency and government in the same sentence if they have ever stepped foot in a post office, Amtrak train or DMV office. I mean one has to make a great effort to imagine that.
 
Quote from piezoe:

...I am not concerned about the size of government...
More...

You should be.

"That government is best which governs least."

Henry David Thoreau

"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys."

P. J. O'Rourke


"A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have."

Gerald R. Ford

"Bureaucracy gives birth to itself and then expects maternity benefits."

Dale Dauten

"I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts."

Will Rogers

"It's not tyranny we desire; it's a just, limited, federal government."

Alexander Hamilton

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government."

Edward Abbey

"My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government."

Thomas Jefferson
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Oy vey, where to start here. One, these "lunatics" as you call them don't want a gold standard, they want competing currencies. Let the dollar compete fairly in the open market place. That's it. Some, like Ron Paul even advocate to have the dollar tied to a "basket" of currencies. Not Gold.

Two, size of government unfortunately IS tied to efficiency. It's also tied to corruption and corporatism. The more powerful you make government, the more crooks you attract. Size is not robust. Or as Taleb would size, large behemoth governments are very fragile.

And the idea of borrowing more money now...really? Piezoe, you do understand, we have to pay this back at some point right? I mean, if we borrow more today, we are going to have outrageous tax hikes in the future. Or massive devaluation in our currency or both. This means you are going to sip the chalice that contains wine from the blood of your children. Why don't we ask them what they think about that.

It boggles my mind how anyone can use the term efficiency and government in the same sentence if they have ever stepped foot in a post office, Amtrak train or DMV office. I mean one has to make a great effort to imagine that.
More...

Mav. I like your posts. Almost always intelligent and thought provoking. I would never favor borrowing to spend on something that wasn't going to appreciate in value. What I am referring to here is investments that will pay for themselves, and then some, in increased productivity, and living standards.

A number of years ago i posted that we would eventually have little choice but to value the dollar relative to a basket of fiat currencies. In effect, that's already occurring to some extent, but hasn't yet been formalized. The SDR of the international monetary fund is based on a basket of currencies. Something more or less equivalent to the SDR will likely replace the dollar before long as the reserve currency. Keynes, foresaw, at Bretton Woods, the defects in using the dollar as a reserve currency. He proposed a reserve currency based on a basket of commodities (which included gold).

If we don't break the medical cartel and bring costs down, and if we don't get our defense spending under control, then our future will be similar to what you described. I'm betting on both those things happening. But we are a nation of crises, and we usually don't act to head off a crisis. We wait until the crisis hits, then we act. We will act. Be patient. You have my personal assurance. Every thing is going to be OK. :D

P.S. You did not, by the way, present a cogent argument against my assertion that if one concentrates on government quality and efficiency, that the size of government will take care of itself. Thoughtlessly reducing the size of government, without paying attention to quality and efficiency, is an absurd idea, and will make matters worse, not better.
 
Quote from piezoe:

Well, among these guys, not that great.:D
More...

What centrist approach is that? You claim to be a centrist? Really? I guess compared to Ricter, you are.
 
Well, Tao, "centrist" is others' characterization. It's fine with me. I see Ricter as more of a centrist than perhaps you do. But would you agree that these labels are silly? Where is the center anyway? Wouldn't it depend on where the ends are?

I enjoy and pay attention to your posts, because they make me think. Have a happy thanksgiving, my favorite holiday. I am off to New Orleans to enjoy it with family and friends.

Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving, everyone.
 
Quote from piezoe:

Well, Tao, "centrist" is others' characterization. It's fine with me. I see Ricter as more of a centrist than perhaps you do. But would you agree that these labels are silly? Where is the center anyway? Wouldn't it depend on where the ends are?

I enjoy and pay attention to your posts, because they make me think. Have a happy thanksgiving, my favorite holiday. I am off to New Orleans to enjoy it with family and friends.

Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving, everyone.
More...

I do not doubt you see ricter as a centrist. But you should realize ricter admits to being a communist... "in theory".
 
Quote from piezoe:

Well, Tao, "centrist" is others' characterization. It's fine with me. I see Ricter as more of a centrist than perhaps you do. But would you agree that these labels are silly? Where is the center anyway? Wouldn't it depend on where the ends are?

I enjoy and pay attention to your posts, because they make me think. Have a happy thanksgiving, my favorite holiday. I am off to New Orleans to enjoy it with family and friends.

Have a happy and safe Thanksgiving, everyone.
More...

Center has indeed become blurry. It also depends on the subject. For example, I am a social liberal. However, I am a fiscal conservative.
 
Quote from jem:

I do not doubt you see ricter as a centrist. But you should realize ricter admits to being a communist... "in theory".
More...
Yeah, in theory; none of the pure 'isms work in practice. From the perspective of this board's average I'm a commie, but in the wider world I'm just a socialist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top