Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Paul Krugman Attacks Britain's Austerity Drive As 'deeply Destructive'


Recommended Posts

No. If that were true there would not have been the massive rise in inequality that the U.S. has experienced. If the reason was to redirect wealth to retirees then a mere 400 families would not now own over half the U.S. wealth.

You are ignoring the fact that the poorest people in capitalist economies are far better off than the majority of people in Socialist economies.

You are also ignoring the fact that in Socialist economies a small group of people still own the vast majority of the wealth.

:blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 311
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Time to put this moron, with a mental age of between 8 and 12, on ignore.....

My first ever.

Congratulations.

Or you could stick your fingers in your ears and go la,la,la,la

That's what we do at Mensa when someone annoys us.

:lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are ignoring the fact that the poorest people in capitalist economies are far better off than the majority of people in Socialist economies.

You are also ignoring the fact that in Socialist economies a small group of people still own the vast majority of the wealth.

:blink:

So these people living in tent cities in the US -

Tent-Cities-460b_981655c.jpg

are better off than the average person living in Scandinavian nations????

Edited by alexw
Link to post
Share on other sites

So these people living in tent cities in the US -

Tent-Cities-460b_981655c.jpg

are better off than the average person living in Scandinavian nations????

Ah the old Scandinavian chestnut.

Very small, extremely rich countries, I could just as easily argue that the gulf states prove that having Feudal Monarchies makes countries wealthy.

The point about the people in the US is that no one is going to round them all up and murder them

and they are not being shot trying to escape to Mexico

Perhaps you could explain why hundreds of thousands of people are still risking their lives trying to get into the US

How many people have died trying to get into Russia???

Apart from the Wermacht of course - but they weren't economic migrants

:blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah the old Scandinavian chestnut.

Very small, extremely rich countries, I could just as easily argue that the gulf states prove that having Feudal Monarchies makes countries wealthy.

The point about the people in the US is that no one is going to round them all up and murder them

and they are not being shot trying to escape to Mexico

Perhaps you could explain why hundreds of thousands of people are still risking their lives trying to get into the US

How many people have died trying to get into Russia???

Apart from the Wermacht of course - but they weren't economic migrants

:blink:

NO.

Answer the question. Do not as you always do and avoid it. You said -

"You are ignoring the fact that the poorest people in capitalist economies are far better off than the majority of people in Socialist economies."

So are the people living in US tent cities better off than the average citizen in Scandinavian nations? Answer yes or no. Only one of these words. Nothing else. Either a Yes or a No. If no then admit your previous statement was incorrect.

Waiting for a yes or a no.

Edited by alexw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Garbage.

The GREATEST period of improvement for the masses in the west was between 1945-1975, and that was and is considered to be a socialist period in history. In the US they even have a name for it, 'the great prosperity'.

That period and its prosperity was caused by the extracting cheap oil, the next chapter will be the great poverty ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

NO.

Answer the question. Do not as you always do and avoid it. You said -

"You are ignoring the fact that the poorest people in capitalist economies are far better off than the majority of people in Socialist economies."

So are the people living in US tent cities better off than the average citizen in Scandinavian nations? Answer yes or no. Only one of these words. Nothing else. Either a Yes or a No. If no then admit your previous statement was incorrect.

Waiting for a yes or a no.

Considering you are supposed to have an IQ of well over 130

your debating tactics are extremely childish

IMHO.

:blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering you are supposed to have an IQ of well over 130

your debating tactics are extremely childish

IMHO.

:blink:

Answer the sodding question. You make sweeping all encompassing statements, and then when you get called out on it avoid answering and dodge the issue just as you are now.

So I will repost -

Answer the question. Do not as you always do and avoid it. You said -

"You are ignoring the fact that the poorest people in capitalist economies are far better off than the majority of people in Socialist economies."

So are the people living in US tent cities better off than the average citizen in Scandinavian nations? Answer yes or no. And if no then admit your previous statement was incorrect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

are better off than the average person living in Scandinavian nations????

The idiot is now trying to wheel out the Scandiavia is Socialist myth, well watch this one blow up in his moron face.

Scandinavia has already shed its Socialist past. Read up on Anders Borg, the Swedish finance minister sometime. The guy has aggressively cut tax and state spending. That's why Sweden is doing so well. Not because it was Socialist in the 80's and early 90's.

Sweden has has no deficit, it has a surplus, every year since 98 barring 03/04. And to think, this idiot alexw is trying to use Sweden as an example of how a big deficit is a good thing

Oh and whats more........

So these people living in tent cities in the US -

Tent-Cities-460b_981655c.jpg

Its Socialist America with its huge debt and deficit that has the tent cities :lol:

20 years ago in this country lefties decided that the US was an example of unfettered free markets and countries like Sweden were Socialist utopias. Over that 20 years the situation in those countries have changed radically, but the leftie hymn sheet never got updated, so they now cite examples that counter their own feeble arguments. :lol:

Its hilarious!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idiot is now trying to wheel out the Scandiavia is Socialist myth, well watch this one blow up in his moron face.

Scandinavia has already shed its Socialist past. Read up on Anders Borg, the Swedish finance minister sometime. The guy has aggressively cut tax and state spending. That's why Sweden is doing so well. Not because it was Socialist in the 80's and early 90's.

Sweden has has no deficit, it has a surplus, every year since 98 barring 03/04. And to think, this idiot alexw is trying to use Sweden as an example of how a big deficit is a good thing

Socialist doesn't mean"runs large deficits"

Sweden has almost the highest tax take in the world, just shy of 50%

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

That certainly helps in not running large deficits. But the deficit hawks always seem to want to close the defict by slashing taxes on the rich and also benfits for the poor. Almost as if they don't care about the deficit at all and just have an idealogical wish to shrink the state....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweden has almost the highest tax take in the world, just shy of 50%

Which used to be a lot higher and keeps getting lower, this is whats driving their recovery.

But the deficit hawks always seem to want to close the defict by slashing taxes on the rich and also benfits for the poor.

No, cutting tax for the rich and poor, cutting benefits for the rich and poor.

an idealogical wish to shrink the state....

Whats wrong with that. The left wants a ever bigger state for purely ideological reasons. They think a bigger state solves everything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Technology enabled new wealth to be created, it was socialism which enabled the masses to direct the flow of the that wealth to the masses.

Thus from 1945 to 1980 when unions and socialism was fairly strong in the US the wages of your average worker doubled. In 1980 with Ronald Reagen the system lurched towards the right with capital becoming ascendent over labour. The unions were eviscerated, via propaganda socialism was turned into a dirty word and destroyed, and with its death the wealth arising from technology was redirected away from the masses to the plutocrats. Thus from 1980 to 2010 the wages of the average worker increased by a mere 8%. Contrast that with the prior time period when it doubled.

Not convinced this is the whole story. I reckon the banks (together with their political mates) used socialism as a convenient tool to divert technologically produced wealth away from the masses into their own accounts. Workers win 20% more 'money' yielding 20% more real stuff, whereas without the a fore mentioned scam the worker would have won 10% more money yielding 30% more stuff.

Imagine that the printing of money had been made a hanging offence, say 50 years ago........avg houses still valued at £400ish??

Link to post
Share on other sites

The idiot is now trying to wheel out the Scandiavia is Socialist myth, well watch this one blow up in his moron face.

Oh...be nice.. Attack his opinions, no personal attack please...

The correct balance is somewhere in the middle and that varies from country to country. Extreme free market is unworkable (Afghanistan, Somalia), and neither did the communist (USSR, DPRK obviously...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...be nice.. Attack his opinions, no personal attack please...

The correct balance is somewhere in the middle and that varies from country to country. Extreme free market is unworkable (Afghanistan, Somalia), and neither did the communist (USSR, DPRK obviously...)

Has a free market ever been tried anywhere??...... you can't really suggest that Afghanistan & Somalia are free though....surely? ...... well you can, of course, if you like :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...be nice.. Attack his opinions, no personal attack please...

The correct balance is somewhere in the middle and that varies from country to country. Extreme free market is unworkable (Afghanistan, Somalia), and neither did the communist (USSR, DPRK obviously...)

Picking two bronze age countries is hardly fair. Why not make Hong Kong your example. Is it because it proves that free markets do work?

Edited by KingBingo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Picking two bronze age countries is hardly fair. Why not make Hong Kong your example. Is it because it proves that free markets do work?

Actually I like HK and Singapore very much. But if you really think HK is a free for all free market, then you need to do some further research.

To begin with, you should look at who control most of the land in HK and which companies control most of the retail, services etc in HK.

For example, try setup a telephone/cable/ satellite TV and try to install those lines/dish in a building managed by one of the 'Hong' and see what happen.. (because the major Hong are also in the same business). Of course there are pockets of opportunities there, but it is just incorrect to say HK is anywhere near a free for all free market.

In a total free market, you know,,,super profit and super market shares get competed away... or maybe it doesn't...

In a total socialist economy, nobody bothers to work.

UK state is most probably far too big right now... You just need to strike a balance between the two.

Edited by easy2012
Link to post
Share on other sites

Answer the sodding question. You make sweeping all encompassing statements, and then when you get called out on it avoid answering and dodge the issue just as you are now.

So I will repost -

Answer the question. Do not as you always do and avoid it. You said -

"You are ignoring the fact that the poorest people in capitalist economies are far better off than the majority of people in Socialist economies."

So are the people living in US tent cities better off than the average citizen in Scandinavian nations? Answer yes or no. And if no then admit your previous statement was incorrect.

I'm not bothering to reply to this post because King Bingo has already answered it.

Unfortunately as you have put him on ignore you will never get to read the logical argument that blows your petulant rant out of the water.

:blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...be nice.. Attack his opinions, no personal attack please...

The correct balance is somewhere in the middle and that varies from country to country. Extreme free market is unworkable (Afghanistan, Somalia), and neither did the communist (USSR, DPRK obviously...)

To be fair it's pretty hard to take someone seriously when the whole basis of their argument is

'my IQ is over 130 and you are an idiot, therefore I am right and you are wrong'

Would anyone with an IQ of over 130 debate in this way?

Well I wouldn't - would you?

:blink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair it's pretty hard to take someone seriously when the whole basis of their argument is

'my IQ is over 130 and you are an idiot, therefore I am right and you are wrong'

Would anyone with an IQ of over 130 debate in this way?

Well I wouldn't - would you?

:blink:

No I won't. But I would be civil enough just to ignore them if reasoning fails. Won't normally go to the length of calling people all sorts...

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair it's pretty hard to take someone seriously when the whole basis of their argument is

'my IQ is over 130 and you are an idiot, therefore I am right and you are wrong'

Would anyone with an IQ of over 130 debate in this way?

Well I wouldn't - would you?

:blink:

Yet again more sweeping statements not based on reality. Please point to me one single statement where I have said or indicate I am right and you are wrong based on my intelligence level. Point me to one statement saying such or retract your statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh...be nice.. Attack his opinions, no personal attack please...

I'm a perfect gentlemen all the time people are being civil.

Alexw on the other hand is a rude c**t, so I feel perfectly entitled to get my c**t out too.

Edited by KingBingo
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet again more sweeping statements not based on reality. Please point to me one single statement where I have said or indicate I am right and you are wrong based on my intelligence level. Point me to one statement saying such or retract your statement.

As for my intelligence the last time I took the mensa test my IQ was 135. I also have a U.S. obtained doctorate in the hard sciences. I'm trying to educate you but it doesn't seem possible sadly.

You did post this earlier I believe.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for my intelligence the last time I took the mensa test my IQ was 135. I also have a U.S. obtained doctorate in the hard sciences. I'm trying to educate you but it doesn't seem possible sadly.

You did post this earlier I believe.

:)

If your going to quote me then take my full post and what I was replying to, which was the following.

"View PostKingBingo, on 02 June 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

Its impossible to have an intelligent conversation with you because you don't have any intelligence.

All you do is google stuff, copy and paste it as your own insights and then make absurd strawman arguments.

Later looser!"

"Amusing I post a logical coherent argument which you don't refute instead deciding to say I have no intelligence.

If i'm wrong please point out where the logical chain of statements I made regarding what you said was incorrect.

As for my intelligence the last time I took the mensa test my IQ was 135. I also have a U.S. obtained doctorate in the hard sciences. I'm trying to educate you but it doesn't seem possible sadly. "

As you can see in no way did I say I was correct and he was wrong based on my intelligence. I refuted someone insulting my intelligence, I also stated that my aim was to educate. To educate means to teach, to pass on knowledge.

So again I'll ask you please point to me one single statement where I have said or indicate I am right and you are wrong based on my intelligence level. Point me to one statement saying such or retract your statement.

Edited by alexw
Link to post
Share on other sites

If your going to quote me then take my full post and what I was replying to, which was the following.

"View PostKingBingo, on 02 June 2012 - 02:59 PM, said:

Its impossible to have an intelligent conversation with you because you don't have any intelligence.

All you do is google stuff, copy and paste it as your own insights and then make absurd strawman arguments.

Later looser!"

"Amusing I post a logical coherent argument which you don't refute instead deciding to say I have no intelligence.

If i'm wrong please point out where the logical chain of statements I made regarding what you said was incorrect.

As for my intelligence the last time I took the mensa test my IQ was 135. I also have a U.S. obtained doctorate in the hard sciences. I'm trying to educate you but it doesn't seem possible sadly. "

As you can see in no way did I say I was correct and he was wrong based on my intelligence. I refuted someone insulting my intelligence, I also stated that my aim was to educate. To educate means to teach, to pass on knowledge.

So again I'll ask you please point to me one single statement where I have said or indicate I am right and you are wrong based on my intelligence level. Point me to one statement saying such or retract your statement.

You demanded one single statement which is what I gave you

and the context is irrelevant in any case as the statement itself is entirely unambiguous.

What you don't seem to realise is that it doesn't matter what you believe, it's what everyone else believes that counts

and if you really had an IQ of 135 you would have worked this out by now.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.