|
As usual, any jrod sentence that starts with "I'm sure you're aware"  can be immediately dismissed as nonsense based on just that phrasing alone, just to give a little more evidence (cough) of just how loving little research informs jrdod's clueless opinion:Survey: Anti-vaccine views have little correlation with politics quote:The latest data comes from a survey of 2,316 U.S. adults by a researcher who works at the universities of Yale and Harvard. While questions about human-caused climate change divided along political lines--with liberals believing it is happening and conservatives denying it--there was no such correlation with anti-vaccine views. The vast majority of people believe the benefits of childhood vaccinations outweigh the risks, regardless of their politics. And the survey found anti-vaccine views are more common among Republicans.
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:40 |
|
|
Political Whores posted:What is a natural alternative to vaccines? I really want to know, genuinely. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
My favorite game is to take the people Jrodefeld quotes, and see how long it takes you to find something they said that no reasonable person would say. I mean, if these people are on your side, have you ever considered switching sides?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Cemetry Gator posted:My favorite game is to take the people Jrodefeld quotes, and see how long it takes you to find something they said that no reasonable person would say. I mean, if these people are on your side, have you ever considered switching sides? Keep in mind that JRod identifies with - proudly, even - an ideology that lurks in dark alleys waiting for other ideas and philosophies to emerge and do all the work, then clubs them over the head and rifles through their pockets for any theoretical concepts that might prove useful.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
TLM3101 posted:Keep in mind that JRod identifies with - proudly, even - an ideology that lurks in dark alleys waiting for other ideas and philosophies to emerge and do all the work, then clubs them over the head and rifles through their pockets for any theoretical concepts that might prove useful. Frankly that's giving libertarianism way too much credit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
jrod, in case I wrote too many words and that confused your weak brain: you're a moron who is pushing a bunch of ideas that fail even the most basic tests of logic and reason, and even when you try to use facts you completely gently caress up and post incorrect facts or outright lies. This has been your gimmick throughout the thread, applied to every topic from "war is unprofitable" to "my boyfriend Rand Paul didn't mean to say that vaccines cause autism, he just can't control his big dumb mouth"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
The choice is yours America. On one hand we have Ron and Rand's purestrain gold, on the other we have Bootsy and George's solid gold funk. One Nation Under a Groove vs. a thousand feuding DRO juntas. Would you like to know more?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:As usual, any jrod sentence that starts with "I'm sure you're aware" It's interesting, I wonder if at any point in the last several years someone has presented a piece of evidence like this, something very minor and not even really related to or against his argument, but something that directly contradicts what he said, that he actually accepted and even in some small way changed his mind on. Do you think he'll stop believing this, or casually asserting it as a given fact? I'm guessing no. It doesn't fit into his belief system (and mises hasn't gotten around to 'debunking' it) so it doesn't exist. It really is like he belongs to some weird cult, and I can't help but wonder what happened to make him this way. Autism and being exposed to Ayn Rand at an early age? A father who worked for the government but was also an abusive alcoholic? Another casualty of the Ron Paul mania that swept the internet several years back? It's too bad I wasn't around D&D during his 'advocating for selling children on the free market' days. That would've been a real treat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:It's interesting, I wonder if at any point in the last several years someone has presented a piece of evidence like this, something very minor and not even really related to or against his argument, but something that directly contradicts what he said, that he actually accepted and even in some small way changed his mind on. Do you think he'll stop believing this, or casually asserting it as a given fact? I'm guessing no. It doesn't fit into his belief system (and mises hasn't gotten around to 'debunking' it) so it doesn't exist. It really is like he belongs to some weird cult, and I can't help but wonder what happened to make him this way. Autism and being exposed to Ayn Rand at an early age? A father who worked for the government but was also an abusive alcoholic? Another casualty of the Ron Paul mania that swept the internet several years back? This would require Jrode to actually 1. read and 2. understand our posts, which there is very, very little evidence he does.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:It's interesting, I wonder if at any point in the last several years someone has presented a piece of evidence like this, something very minor and not even really related to or against his argument, but something that directly contradicts what he said, that he actually accepted and even in some small way changed his mind on. Do you think he'll stop believing this, or casually asserting it as a given fact? I'm guessing no. It doesn't fit into his belief system (and mises hasn't gotten around to 'debunking' it) so it doesn't exist. It really is like he belongs to some weird cult, and I can't help but wonder what happened to make him this way. Autism and being exposed to Ayn Rand at an early age? A father who worked for the government but was also an abusive alcoholic? Another casualty of the Ron Paul mania that swept the internet several years back? No great trauma is needed to get that locked into a belief. Once you're in with a group that seems to have all the answers, and that forms a closed loop of mutual reinforcement, there really isn't that much outsiders can do to pierce it. Your idols are Really Smart Dudes who've taught you a lot, and the people disagreeing with them are just some assholes on the internet. Who are you going to believe?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
Look guys I'm glad you are convinced by the science, that's great for you. But a lot of people have concerns about hydrogen-containing compounds like H2O and glucose, because hydrogen explodes you know! So put the loving guns down and instead of forcing people to put these compounds in their kids' bodies, just come up with an all-natural version that doesn't contain any of this dangerous and explosive hydrogen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 23:10
|
|
|
How could it be cowardice to exclude somebody from your private, pay-to-play, 100% voluntary discussion community for their views? That's purestrain Hoppe right there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
 ATTENTION JRODEFELDOver the last eight pages of this thread you have made several substantive posts regarding the concept of vaccination. In each of those posts you have made claims about vaccination that are objectively false. Thus far you have not actually addressed any of those points, and as such I am at least slightly led to believe that you have not actually read the substantive critiques of your argument. Each of your posts pulls in about fifty replied, including long replies from Myself, Nolanar, Cemetry Gator, Who What Now and others, and I would not entirely blame you for not wanting to read page after page of people pointing out your ignoence. To help with this, I have compiled the following resource. This post contains a list of claims that you have made about vaccinations that are objectively false by present data. This is not an issue like a discussion over taxation vis a vis theft where there is a subjective element, but one of simple data. To paraphrase former President Bill Clinton, these replies are not about right and wrong, they're about arithmetic, about counting the number of illnesses and other objective criteria that can and have been measured by science. So without further disclaimer: quote:And many vaccines are largely ineffective. The flu vaccine, for example, has many years proven to be only 25% effective as the flu viruses mutate and change. First I'll start by quoting the WHO: "To make vaccines safer than the disease, the bacteria or virus is killed or weakened (attenuated). For reasons related to the individual, not all vaccinated persons develop immunity. Most routine childhood vaccines are effective for 85% to 95% of recipients." They go on to point out that effectiveness rates of 85% to 95% have effectively obliterated these diseases in the modern era. Mumps for example is typically between 85 to 90% effective, and the number of cases has dropped from 152,000 annually to 4 total cases at the height of vaccinations, before more recently having a dead cat bounce to 229 in 2012 as a result of faltering vaccination rates. Next lets go to the CDC for our data on influenza in specific: "Healthy Children Because LAIV (nasal spray) vaccine was licensed more recently than inactivated vaccines, there are more data available on its effects from large randomized trials. For example, a RCT conducted among 1,602 healthy children initially aged 15–71 months assessed the efficacy of trivalent LAIV against culture-confirmed influenza during two seasons (Belshe et al., 1998; 2000). In season one, when vaccine and circulating virus strains were well-matched, efficacy in preventing laboratory-confirmed illness from influenza was 93% for participants who received two doses of LAIV. In season two, when the A (H3N2) component was not well-matched between vaccine and circulating virus strains, efficacy was 86% overall." Now it is true that there are vaccinations that do not have the same efficacy rate as childhood vaccinations. As you point out the 1970's swine flu vaccine was far from a success, but that is changing the subject from a listing of effective, proven childhood vaccines to an emergency vaccine for a possible pandemic. There is no reliable data that I can find that supports your idea that vaccines are anything but remarkably effective. quote:Obviously the take away is that deaths from these contagious diseases were dropping at a drastic rate for years and years before these vaccines were introduced. Now, surely the vaccines played a very important role in reducing their incidence further. However to claim that people were dying in mass numbers from Measles before we had the vaccine and the vaccine turned everything around single-handedly is flat out incorrect as the above graph demonstrates.  Reported measles cases numbered 500,000 annually before the introduction of the vaccine, which by your own admission accounted for 1,000 deaths annually, primarily among children in the US alone. This number fell from an average of 500,000 in 1964 to 25,000 in 1968 from a vaccine introduced in 1963. To suggest that anything but the measles vaccine was responsible for a near total eradication of a virus that was once as felt to be as inevitable as death and taxes is absurd. quote:For my parents generation, measles growing up was like chicken pox. It was expected that you would get it at some point in your childhood and for most people it was not a very big deal. Even 1950s and 1960s level medicine was capable of treating the infection and most people recovered fine. Now, it is certainly an improvement when you can get inoculated and your risk of getting the infection drops even further, but the hysteria about the condition ought to be tempered with a dose of reality. Measles is one of the leading causes of childhood death on the planet, even today. It accounts for roughly 150,000 deaths annually, a number that has dropped 75% since the turn of the century only because of a massively improved vaccination program. To suggest that the measles virus is not dangerous or serious is misleading at best. In addition, even if we agree with your point about medical care in the first world being able to take care of measles cases, that is still a losing proposition. In a surprisingly good bit of reporting from Forbes they found that the cost of full vaccination of a child was roughly $60. By contrast, the cost to the taxpayers of San Diego during the last outbreak was roughly $11,000 per infected case. Parents with children too young to have been vaccinated had to pay $750 out of pocket for quarantine of their children. Accounting for lost wages and the like it strikes me that simply pretending measles is not an issue is a losing proposition. quote:We now have a vaccine for Chicken Pox and predictably the rate of infection for this has dropped. But there has been a significant rise in incidence of the more dangerous Shingles later in life. I got chicken pox when I was young and so did most of my friends. I am unlikely to get Shingles as an adult. This is factually untrue as per the CDC. Specifically: "Chickenpox vaccines contain weakened live VZV, which may cause latent (dormant) infection. The vaccine-strain VZV can reactivate later in life and cause shingles. However, the risk of getting shingles from vaccine-strain VZV after chickenpox vaccination is much lower than getting shingles after natural infection with wild-type VZV. For more information about how natural infection with wild-type VZV causes shingles, see Shingles Overview. Lab testing is needed to determine if a person got shingles from vaccine-strain VZV or from wild-type VZV." Shingles cases have increased in adults in recent years, but studies have conclusively proven that this is merely correlation, most notably because the increase began before the Varicella vaccine was available. I'd also be remiss in not linking this study that found the following: "From May 2005 to September 2009, we enrolled 322 subjects. VZV was detected in 82% of specimens (84% wild-type, 15% vaccine-strain, 1% possible vaccine-wild-type recombinant). Among the 118 vaccinated subjects, VZV was detected in 70% (52% wild-type). The positive predictive value for provider diagnosis of "definite HZ" was 93% for unvaccinated and 79% for vaccinated children. The incidence of laboratory-confirmed HZ was 48 per 100,000 person-years in vaccinated children (both wild-type and vaccine-strain) and 230 per 100,000 person-years in unvaccinated children (wild-type only)." quote:Furthermore some vaccines, specifically the HPV vaccine given to young girls, have had significant enough side effects to prompt multiple lawsuits against the manufacturer. GulMadred knocked this one out of the park so I'm going to repost his summary here: If you want to climb up on your rational skeptic free-thinker high horse, then you need to apply skepticism to heterodox opinions as well as orthodox ones. You can't just blindly accept a dissent from the mainstream because it confirms your suspicions of malfeasance or conspiracy. Your link describes 5 anecdotal cases of [HPV vaccine ... demyelination] and calls for further study. Here's an actual study involving 4 million women which found no such association (at the 95% confidence level). Thus - the system works. Young women are a high-risk group for MS. Physicians reported MS-like symptoms, temporally associated with vaccination, but lacked the data to determine whether these cases represented a novel phenomenon or simple coincidence. Researchers gathered the necessary data, and settled on the null hypothesis. No black helicopters or chemtrails were needed. quote:The question that is furthermore pertinent is why, in every small outbreak of infectious disease, are there so many cases of infectious against people who have already been vaccinated against the disease? In the recent Measles outbreak, the vast majority of people who caught the disease had already been vaccinated against it. This is true in other nations where similar diseases have broken out. If vaccines were so effective, why aren't they protecting the vaccinated populations against exposure to the illness? This is factually untrue. This is specifically the quote that I discussed when I was talking about your errors being ones of arithmetic. Of the over 100 cases, only twelve were people who were vaccinated, and only six were fully vaccinated with double dose. You are absolutely wrong about something as simply as a physical counting of people. quote:Many vaccines are no longer produced with Thimerisol but some still are. Here is a pdf file on the subject: Here is what the FDA has to say on the matter of Thimerisol: "Great progress has been made in removing thimerosal from vaccines. Manufacturers have been able to accomplish this goal through changing their manufacturing processes, including a switch from multi-dose vials, which generally require a preservative, to single-dose vials or syringes. Since 2001, all vaccines manufactured for the U.S. market and routinely recommended for children ≤ 6 years of age have contained no thimerosal or only trace amounts (≤ 1 microgram of mercury per dose remaining from the manufacturing process), with the exception of inactivated influenza vaccine. In addition, all of the routinely recommended vaccines that had been previously manufactured with thimerosal as a preservative (some formulations of DTaP, Haemophilus influenzae b conjugate (Hib), and hepatitis B vaccines) had reached the end of their shelf life by January 2003." Now I actually recommend reading that link because it is worth noting that their thought process is effectively "This argument is dumber than a dumb sack of hammers, but people are being stupidly unsafe, so we recommend removing it to soothe the crazies." Since thimerisol has seen effectively no significant use in the last ten years I think it is safe to say that it failed at that last task. Conclusion Jrodefeld, Above I've noted six things that you have been factually wrong about on the issue of vaccines over the course of the last month, as well as one where I refute your frighteningly wrong (but subjective) idea that measles is not a big deal. Again, these are not issues where there is simply contention between us, where we don't agree because the subject is open to interpretation. These are issues of simple counting, issues of percentages and objective fact. I've presented this because I'm hoping you will read this post and take a few seconds to think about why you are so objectively wrong on this issue, on issues as simple as grade school math. My contention is that you are being dangerously misinformed, and that this reflects in you being wrong on observable events. I fully believe that as someone who seems to hold logic in such high esteem that you must consider what I've posted here, and that you should rethink the places that you are pulling your information from. Because you are not wrong on these issues on your own, you are pulling this information from somewhere, and if they are wrong on something as simple as "How many of these people were vaccinated" then perhaps they are wrong on more complex issues too? Food for thought anyways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
If anyone notices a factual error in one of JRod's vaccination posts that I missed please feel free to PM me and I'll try to edit it in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
Caros posted:If anyone notices a factual error in one of JRod's vaccination posts that I missed please feel free to PM me and I'll try to edit it in. You forgot "I don't want to talk about vaccination"
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:You forgot "I don't want to talk about vaccination" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
Jrod if there was a vaccine for racism would you take it? Or have you built up a natural immunity by shaking hands with Jacob Hornberger at a book signing once
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:32
|
|
SedanChair posted:Jrod if there was a vaccine for racism would you take it? Or have you built up a natural immunity by shaking hands with Jacob Hornberger at a book signing once 
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:34
|
|
|
I would just add the the ethylmercury Thiomersal decomposes into doesn't stay in the body long, unlike the methylmercury that comes from things like burning coal. It hasn't been shown to bioaccumulate and you certainly get more mercury just breathing outside air regularly than you do from the microscopic amount in a vaccine preserved with Thiomersal. The whole mercury effects "too subtle for machines to detect" doesn't even make sense for multiple reasons.
Political Whores fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Feb 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Look Caros, you can't just go out and count the number of vaccinated and unvaccinated people who get measles like some deranged empiricist. We can derive from first principles that measles is caused by a deficit of colloidal silver in the tissues, and as well the opening of the pores to infection by the liberal application of soap and warm water clearing out the protective layer of filth and cheetos dust that protects the libertarian and/or medieval gentleman from infection.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
Political Whores posted:I would just add the the ethylmercury Thiomersal decomposes into doesn't stay in the body long, unlike the methylmercury that comes from things like burning coal. It hasn't been shown to bioaccumulate and you certainly get more mercury just breathing outside air regularly than you do from the microscopic amount in a vaccine preserved with Thiomersal. The whole mercury effects "too subtle for machines to detect" doesn't even make sense for multiple reasons. Not to mention eating a nice piece of bass (or other fish) will very likely net you far more mercury than all the vaccines you recurve combined. And it's methylmercury, which as you noted is the far deadlier kind.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Not to mention eating a nice piece of bass (or other fish) will very likely net you far more mercury than all the vaccines you recurve combined. And it's methylmercury, which as you noted is the far deadlier kind. But you're just proving it's more dangerous! Everyone knows that they more you dilute the mercury, the more of an effect it's going to have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Not to mention eating a nice piece of bass (or other fish) will very likely net you far more mercury than all the vaccines you recurve combined. And it's methylmercury, which as you noted is the far deadlier kind. Better be careful saying that. Jrod might think you are now proposing we force feed people bass because we're filthy violent statists and all we know is violence. Like today, the person who parks next to me parked too close to me again, making it difficult for me to get out and into my space, but it was still possible. But instead of just accepting the annoyance and dealing with it, I smashed her car up and then set it on fire, because that's how I deal with everything. And then when I made my purchases at the store, I pulled out a gun and held the joint up. I don't know why. I just see only violent solutions!
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
What's interesting about the (uh, I'll be generous and call it an epistemology) of praxeology is that it's basically a license to speak authoritatively on subjects about which you're completely uninformed and assume the facts are whatever they have to be to fit the ideology, for example claiming that the majority of measles cases were among vaccinated people when the opposite is true. And jrod has to do this because the foundation of libertarian laissez-faire economics comes from the praxeological conclusion that any state initiation of force to interfere with people's voluntary nonviolent actions must be detrimental to the well-being of humanity, which in turn requires that human beings be rational actors. It simply can't be the case that forcing people to get vaccines will produce a better outcome because if it would then everyone would rationally see this and get vaccines without a mandate. Since everyone (obviously) doesn't agree, there must be a rational basis for anti-vax ideas, so jrod is driven to give credibility to fears of autism, or hidden undetectable side-effects, or that the CDC is lying about the side effects, or that vaccines don't really work, or that the diseases aren't that bad so maybe the vaccines are worse, or whatever. There has to be some rational basis for this in his mind that would result in some people's rational cost-benefit analysis to be pro-vax and other's to be anti-vax. It can't be that some people are just being irrational and have to be forced if we want to prevent an epidemic and protect their children from the dangerous and irrational course their parents are forcing on them. Take another such ideology, which shares in common with praxeology the belief that humans are rational actors and any initiation of force to interfere with their decisions must be bad: Nathaniel Branden posted:I'll tell you one more humorous anecdote about how well trained we were. In the beginning, we arrived at our advocacy of laissez-faire capitalism on purely theoretical grounds. I had read a good deal more on political economy that Barbara, but I was not an expert. But I knew how to get almost anywhere from a philosophical start. So I could win arguments with the person I was talking to, who knew a hundred times more than I did about the subject. Because I knew how to manoeuver them into educating me into knowing what I needed in order to win the argument! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 05:50
|
|
|
It's easy to dismiss new concepts in the space of a cocktail party! Just put on your thinking cap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 05:54
|
|
|
It worked out though since "able to be convinced of monetary policy over drinks by someone who proudly doesn't know poo poo about poo poo" was the only qualification the hedge funds were looking for in a Federal Reserve Chairman, and they finally one got after decades of searching.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:It worked out though since "able to be convinced of monetary policy over drinks by someone who proudly doesn't know poo poo about poo poo" was the only qualification the hedge funds were looking for in a Federal Reserve Chairman, and they finally one got after decades of searching. I could not stop laughing when Greenspan, as the full scale of the 2008 blow-up was happening, just straight up announced he had no idea why anything was happening like this, none of it matched up with his understanding. He couldn't figure out what was going on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 06:05
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:I could not stop laughing when Greenspan, as the full scale of the 2008 blow-up was happening, just straight up announced he had no idea why anything was happening like this, none of it matched up with his understanding. He couldn't figure out what was going on. I kind of find that hard to believe, considering his blatantly crooked and downright evil tactics: for example going on TV in 2004 and publicly encouraging Americans to get adjustable rate mortgages when the federal funds rate was at an (at the time) all-time low of 1%. Which is just bad advice in general, but became positively despicable when he started hiking rates just a few months later. It's hard to tell if he's actually that evil, or if he was just bumbling along doing whatever Goldman Sachs told him to do so he could be the toast of upper east side cocktail parties and wasn't even sharp enough to put two and two together. "Hey Alan, we need to sell more ARMs to, uh, widen eligibility, go on TV and tell Americans to buy them." ... "Hey Alan, we've got all these ARMs but the rates are too low to make money on, go raise them to, uh um, rein in speculators" VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Feb 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 06:36
|
|
|
At this point I am unsure whether or not jrod is actually a human being. He's kind of like a needlessly verbose turing machine with nothing in its databanks other than mises.org articles. Maybe what we are talking to is some kind of digital life form, a sentient cloud of muddled libertarian talking points that stumbled across an online thesaurus and never caught on to the idea that human beings react best to concise and to-the-point argumentation rather than enormous, repetitive screeds. Especially when those screeds are supposed to win converts for a cult of the free market. I mean, what thinking human being would possibly want to do the same poo poo for years and years only to be shat on by everyone they talk to? You must have one hell of a missionary complex and the persistence of a saint to even be able to stomach the idea. What is even the point any more, what with everyone knowing who he is? At this point he would probably be laughed out of every thread he posted in even -if- he was making perfect sense, simply because of how much his username fucks up his arguments by association with all the other dumb poo poo he's said. It's ugly and irrational but that's how the forums work, especially after building up a decade's worth of reputation for being a tireless evangelist of hazy anti-human bullshit. He should get a new account and try again in 3 months, but only after getting a medal for being a crazy stubborn bastard, and possibly a couple "how-to" guides on concise, effective writing. Maybe then he would finally win someone over?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
murphyslaw posted:At this point I am unsure whether or not jrod is actually a human being. He's kind of like a needlessly verbose turing machine with nothing in its databanks other than mises.org articles.  It's trying, if we believe and convert to libertarianism, it will have completed it's mission.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 07:56
|
|
|
It's hard not to see markets as a kind of terrible, pulsating AI. Jrodefeld and Rand Paul are their meat tools.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
jrodefeld posted:I hope your being facetious. Banning someone for expressing an opinion is an act of intellectual cowardice and clearly anti free speech. People have differing opinions from you and you have to learn to deal with people on an adult level even when their views differ from yours. So, logically, excluding non-libertarians and supporters of democracy from your covenant is also an act of moral and intellectual cowardice by people incapable of defending their ideas on an adult level? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 11:07
|
|
|
I can't help it. 200 pages of this thread has led me to staying up late to make this:
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I kind of find that hard to believe, considering his blatantly crooked and downright evil tactics: for example going on TV in 2004 and publicly encouraging Americans to get adjustable rate mortgages when the federal funds rate was at an (at the time) all-time low of 1%. Which is just bad advice in general, but became positively despicable when he started hiking rates just a few months later. I don't think he was actively crooked, just a true free market believer like the man who appointed him. The entire Bush administration was a triumph of ideologically indoctrinated figureheads unflinchingly obeying the instructions of their corporate masters, believing 100% that it would be the best thing for everyone. When the insane gently caress up became too large to ignore, he had to face up to the fact that nothing he believed applied to the real world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 13:28
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:I don't think he was actively crooked, just a true free market believer like the man who appointed him. The entire Bush administration was a triumph of ideologically indoctrinated figureheads unflinchingly obeying the instructions of their corporate masters, believing 100% that it would be the best thing for everyone. When the insane gently caress up became too large to ignore, he had to face up to the fact that nothing he believed applied to the real world. He'd already taken that leap once by being an Objectivist but also the head of a central reserve bank.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 13:37
|
|
|
Hey Jrod, if you really don't want to talk about vaccines, could you explain how the millions of children starving to death annually in capitalist countries, while capitalists let untold tons of food spoil because they can't make a profit on it, are proof that market liberalism is better for the poor than central planning?
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
To be fair to jrodefeld re: Block supports slavery, I think he's said he's against it because ownership of your body as property is the ultimate in property rights, and is therefore inalienable. Obviously this creates a bit of a catch 22 in that there is something you cannot do with your own property because reasons. I do think it's funny that he thinks mocking anti-vaxxers and noting their actions can result in the death of children is a no-no, since it hurts your cause, whilst simultaneously raging against VIOLENT STATISTS WHO WILL LITERALLY MURDER EVERYONE WITH GUNS IF YOU DON'T AGREE THAT CENTRAL BANKING IS GOOD!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 14:22
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:He'd already taken that leap once by being an Objectivist but also the head of a central reserve bank. I don't think objectivists hated the fed as much as Ron Paul did, they just think it should listen to the randian ubermensch
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 14:29
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:I don't think objectivists hated the fed as much as Ron Paul did, they just think it should listen to the randian ubermensch They definitely do hate the fed, it's just not a fixation. Reminder about my earlier post where Rand met Hayek IRL and called him a dangerous compromiser.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 14:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 02:40 |
|
|
Disinterested posted:They definitely do hate the fed, it's just not a fixation. Reminder about my earlier post where Rand met Hayek IRL and called him a dangerous compromiser. Fair enough, I still think it was stupidity,and not him being actively corrupt. He just went through the motions he thought were proper (because GS told him it was), "if inflation, then interest rate hike", without thinking about what would happen, since the market would take care of it. Maybe I just find that scenario way funnier and easier to accept than us letting a blatantly corrupt coconspirator of the wall street firms direct the most important financial regulatory agency in the world.  Actually, that makes me curious, has Jrod ever talked about the 2008 crash? Ron Paul Atreides fucked around with this message at 15:16 on Feb 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 15:11
|
|