Ron Paul: "Bernie is just a variant of Trump"

He said there would be another round of QE before the end of 2015 (and he also guaranteed no rate hike, but we didn't bet on that) and that YOY GDP growth would be negative (part of his "biggest crash ever" thread). When it became clear that he was going to lose, he pretended to have mistakenly thought that he was betting that the YOY Q4 GDP growth rate would be lower in 2015 than it was in 2014. I said that his claim sounded bizarre given the discussion but that I'd release him from the consequences of his loss.

Interestingly, later in the exchange where he backed out, he indicating that he didn't even know what GDP was. He also betrayed his finance guy act by demonstrating that he didn't even know what shorting was.

Here's what I mean:



!!!



The change caused by the ARRA was in line with expectations. The baseline was worse than was estimated at the time of the chart. Bad example.

Hopefully others who followed that thread got something out of the time you put into it. Engaging with guys like Greoric on internet forums is only fruitful in the sense that one might make points that enlighten lurkers.
 
Hopefully others who followed that thread got something out of the time you put into it. Engaging with guys like Greoric on internet forums is only fruitful in the sense that one might make points that enlighten lurkers.

That's what I've concluded. I do respond to him for the benefit of anyone else, but I have no hope of getting anything out of him other than character attacks (which itself is educational).

If I were Ron Paul and people constantly accused me of being a moron or crazy, I'd just point to my bank account and ask them how much they have made betting on what the Fed is going to do. Dude is a millionaire several times over for predicting the gradual collapse of the dollar.

Er, I don't think that's true. If he's actually been putting his money where his mouth is on the "collapse of the dollar," he's been losing tons of money.
 
Jack being a liar, a narcissist, and a fraud is known, Greoric. It comes as no surprise.

Absolutely. In my mind, its important that the WR sees how Jack pathologically uses the victim card, projects and deceives. Posters that agree with him politically on a large swath of issues can't stand him. He's a cancer preventing legitimate discussion on here. I make light of the sociopathy I comment on sometimes, but this guy is the real deal. Frankly its scary.
 
That's exactly right. Removing the gun (force of government) from the room is what's necessary, not replacing it with an RPG.

LOL, I don't know how you guys think this is the solution.

The solution is to not to regulate business, it is to break it up, and decentralize it.

If you would agree to shatter these forms of centralized power into 1,000's of pieces, then I could agree to shrink government.

The idea that you can just fold up government, when these corporate forms of centralized power are so dominate that they can control our government, is insane.

I will not put myself willingly at the whim of the good nature of people whose only purpose is to generate profit by any means necessary.
 
I find it funny how everyone is attacking Trump for wanting the US to shoulder less of the NATO burden and lessen foreign aid when both Pauls have been advocating this for years. Paul is just a variant of Trump. See how that goes?
 
Frankly, I'm surprised that you're not appreciating my argument on this being THE science poster on here. The contrarian arguments have to be made by attacking its premises or conclusions. Evidence can help make a case, but it can't absolve any position on its own. Why? Because conclusions made from the evidence would be conjecture without any counterfactuals, which we aren't privy to in macro economics.
Hypothetical-deductive > deductive = inductive.
 
This shows why so many people hold the position that you do. You're actually more afraid of a business than you are Government. And this makes no sense whatsoever. You have to voluntarily do business with a business - unless Government is involved. You have to do business with Government no matter what.

Businesses aren't free to be tyrannical, unless they've come into possession of powers granted to them by Government. In a Free Market a business is held in check by it's own greed. A business can't charge $1000 for bananas because another business will charge .25 for bananas and the greedy business will destroy it's reputation and consumers will take their money elsewhere. A business who desires profit can only do so by marketing and appealing to the largest amount of people it can. If they are abusing people, people will choose to go elsewhere.

With Government there are no such controls. And Government can fuck you whether you like it or not, whether you chose to do business with them or not. A Government can strip you of your rights. A business cannot.

So when people like you make the argument that a business can be as brutal and tyrannical as it wants, and they champion more Government power, I have to wonder where your screws went loose. It's as if you're not even TRYING to understand what's going on. You're so determined for the enemy to be a business that you're blinded to reality. It's the same with the masochists and Islamists. These people are so convinced in their narrative that the West is at fault for everything, that they're willing to back genocidal groups just because those groups oppose the West.

Oh god, not the "customers will choose" idiocy again.

Tobacco was literally killing its customers for decades and bitterly fought for the ability to continue to kill them until there was some regulation. Same thing with alcohol. If there were no laws (aka, gubmint regulation) saying what age you have to be and where you can consume it, it'd be killing even more people than it already does.

I'm not even going to get into chemical and energy companies' blatant disregard for the environment and the people living in them. They poison and pollute people at will and would be even worse if there wasn't some regulation.

When business abuses its customers and customers walk away, they simply get more customers. When they abuse their workers, they just get more workers.

And yeah, you can't "get away from government" but that's because the government also deals with you and "gives" you shit without asking for it. All the roads you've ever traveled on, the schools that taught your dumbass, any public park you've ever set foot on, any cop that's ever helped you, has done so without you hiring them.
 
I'm not even going to get into chemical and energy companies' blatant disregard for the environment and the people living in them.
It's almost like you're saying that economic and political theory developed for an agrarian economy where externalities were both limited and easily quantified might not be applicable today. Why would theory that can deal with a neighbor stealing from you not be directly applicable to situations where companies on the other side of the globe can kill the planet?

What a crazy thought.
 
I agree with you, but without all the nitty gritty that make those tests verifiable then its useless.
Taken to it's extreme that view would negate applicability for everything, including physics. There's room between Pangloss and nihilism.
 
Oh god, not the "customers will choose" idiocy again.

Tobacco was literally killing its customers for decades and bitterly fought for the ability to continue to kill them until there was some regulation. Same thing with alcohol. If there were no laws (aka, gubmint regulation) saying what age you have to be and where you can consume it, it'd be killing even more people than it already does.

I'm not even going to get into chemical and energy companies' blatant disregard for the environment and the people living in them. They poison and pollute people at will and would be even worse if there wasn't some regulation.

When business abuses its customers and customers walk away, they simply get more customers. When they abuse their workers, they just get more workers.

And yeah, you can't "get away from government" but that's because the government also deals with you and "gives" you shit without asking for it. All the roads you've ever traveled on, the schools that taught your dumbass, any public park you've ever set foot on, any cop that's ever helped you, has done so without you hiring them.

Ah yes the argument that since government steals from you and sprinkles some crumbs from the table top to pave the roads we must then be grateful. I'm sure the people waiting for bread from the government in Russia should have just shut their mouths and been thankful that the government was even giving them any food, right? Those ungrateful twats. How dare they question the efficiency of a compulsory funded monopoly to provide them things.
 
Taken to it's extreme that view would negate applicability for everything, including physics. There's room between Pangloss and nihilism.

Certainly not, because we can account for confounding variables in physics that we can't account for with millions of unique human beings conducting billions of transactions.
 
Certainly not, because we can account for confounding variables in physics that we can't account for with millions of unique human beings conducting billions of transactions.
You're not actually correct but, moving on, no biology then. Trillions of cells conducting quadrillions of transactions.
 
You're not actually correct but, moving on, no biology then. Trillions of cells conducting quadrillions of transactions.

Pretty easy to set up and plate one hundred cultures in ten different media....

Not so easy to get people in a large geographical area and tell them we're going to test all of you on what system is the best to distribute resources, control for cultural differences, demographics, etc...
 
Last edited:
Ah yes the argument that since government steals from you and sprinkles some crumbs from the table top to pave the roads we must then be grateful. I'm sure the people waiting for bread from the government in Russia should have just shut their mouths and been thankful that the government was even giving them any food, right? Those ungrateful twats. How dare they question the efficiency of a compulsory funded monopoly to provide them things.

Lol at bringing up Stalinism. What a spaz.

Yeah, the state is a bitch. Unfortunately, that's the direction humanity has gone the past 5,000 years. Still pining for those sweet hunter and gatherer times, huh?
 
Lol at bringing up Stalinism. What a spaz.

Yeah, the state is a bitch. Unfortunately, that's the direction humanity has gone the past 5,000 years. Still pining for those sweet hunter and gatherer times, huh?

Oops, can't provide a relevant example to get you into perspective. My fault. I forgot that isn't allowed.

At least you admit what the state is. I can appreciate that as a first. Slavery was around for thousands of years prior to it being outlawed. Why is the immorality of the state not even up for discussion in the 21st century?
 
Back
Top