« First « Previous Comments 145 - 178 of 178 Search these comments
You yourself practice discrimination in your own life.
The more you write the more you prove my case. I try to avoid racial discrimination, however, you have the right to practice it in PRIVATE. The libertarians want the ability to practice it in PUBLIC BUSINESS.
That is unlawful and it should stay that way.
The freedom to discriminate/disassociate is eroding fast. Private clubs are being bombarded with hate when they discriminate. Business owners advocating marriage to stay between man and woman only as their PRIVATE opinion are being told by crony politicians that they are not welcome in "their" city and zoning and other laws are used to prevent the business. I may not agree with their views but I think a business owner should be able to convert his business into a "private club" with member fees and discriminate however the see fit. You see any ugly bitchez at hooters? Any old grannies? Any gay men serving your chicken wings? Don't think so. Furthermore there are tons of armchair liberals/progressives that hate every homophobic soul out there but as soon as their daughter starts dating a black guy (if they are white or vice versa) or an affordable housing project is announced in their neighborhood or next to their kids school, then all the tolerance goes out of the window instantly. I'd rather have a slightly homophobic pal who is honest about it (and I would likely debate him) than one of those armchair good-doers. Also, just because somebody advocates something fairly extreme like Schiff advocating extreme freedom for the business owner doesn't mean they themselves are racist or support racism, it just means that some principle in their political views is so strong that they cannot advocate prohibiting freedoms that could be abused because it would directly collide with their principles. For example you could be an advocate for welfare although you know that at any given amount of time there will be X amount of people who totally abuse the system because the alternative of no safety net for those in real need seems worse to you.
They'll stay for an average of 17 years (according to what I found googling it), and won't really be that concerned about resale.
I suspect you're way off the mark with that figure.
Yes, I hope those people keep putting their money into an over priced home they are barely hanging onto. Debt servitude should teach them a good lesson over the next 10 years or so.
17 years is extremely off the mark, by over a decade.
Ownership rates are parabolic. 40% of people are at least 15 years at the same place and 40% are less than 3 years. The average amongst people who aren't just 'house hopping' is 17 years.
Ownership rates are parabolic. 40% of people are at least 15 years at the same place and 40% are less than 3 years. The average amongst people who aren't just 'house hopping' is 17 years.
Why don't you just admit you were wrong on your original point instead of posting evasive garbage like that?
Libertarians believe in discrimination by the individual. Discrimination is the core concept of liberty. It is when the individual chooses among all options and rejects the other options for any reason, even if ignorantly based on racial criteria.
@bgamall4 may like the government giving us but one option and forcing it on us, or face oppression, but I don't. @bgamall4 is a hypocrite. He discriminates every day. When he bought his new car, you can bet he chose what color it was. Perhaps he picked a black car. That means he rejected every other color. He picked his car based solely on its color and liked that choice. But with his utopian world, it would be government only allowing him to buy a white car, since black absorbs heat and causes global warming. @bgamall4 didn't allow the government to pick his spouse. He chose her and discriminated against every other woman. @bgamall4 picked his friends and discriminated against all others. He chooses who he lets inside of his living room. Discrimination! And when bgamall4 goes to his favored religious institution, you can bet he would have an issue if some muslims came in and started wailing in the aisle or a pack of satanists started burning a cross on stage. In fact, I bet bgamall4 would call the cops and have them arrested. Discrimination. And when bgamall4 registered to vote, I am pretty sure he discriminated against the other political party.
See, the issue is that we should all be allowed to discriminate. As long as we don't physically harm another it is liberty. Pretending that humans can all love one another and just sing Kumbayah doesn't work. It creates tension. We need to get to a point where we can each tolerate anothers opinion. Yeah, that opinion may be arrogant or ignorant. While Libertarians think a private business should be allowed to turn away a customer for any reason, it doesn't mean they are racists. In fact, they would be the first ones to have an issue with state sanctioned racism. They stand against state segregation as well as affirmative action. Knowing both are force upon all individuals. They don't want government telling blacks they can't vote, but would allow a private college to reject them as long as they get no government funding. Just because one believes in liberty doesn't mean they think ones choice is righteous over another. It doesn't mean because that choice is availble they would partake of it. Many Libertarians want to legalize drugs and prostitution, though they may be married for 30 years and never even had a cup of coffee. They know that choice should be up to the indivdual to choose. If the individual makes a bad choice then it is personal responsibility which then comes into play. Government shouldn't be forcing that individual to make a choice. They should only be there to protect another individual when the first individual neglected to take personal responsibility for harm done.
@Cheeseus Sonofdog, thank you for your post. You obviously understand libertarianism.
The libertarian who is happily engaged expounding his political philosophy in the full glory of his convictions is almost sure to be brought short by one unfailing gambit of the statist. As the libertarian is denouncing public education or the Post Office, or refers to taxation as legalized robbery, the statist invariably challenges. "Well, then are you an anarchist?" The libertarian is reduced to sputtering "No, no, of course I'm not an anarchist." "Well, then, what governmental measures do you favor? What type of taxes do you wish to impose?" The statist has irretrievably gained the offensive, and, having no answer to the first question, the libertarian finds himself surrendering his case.
In the 1950s and still relevant today.
"Well, then are you an anarchist?"
Of course not, the government has a role in the Libertarian world; to ensure non-coercion, and protect against violence.
AFAIK, these are not precepts of an anarchist.
Yes, I hope those people keep putting their money into an over priced home they are barely hanging onto. Debt servitude should teach them a good lesson over the next 10 years or so.
then why are you currently shopping for a house?
http://patrick.net/?p=1218856
http://patrick.net/?p=1218790
34 Olivehurst, Irvine, CA 92602
By Goran_K Follow (2) Thu, 15 Nov 2012, 9:19am 91 views 0 comments
In Irvine CA 92614 Watch (1) Share Quote Permalink Like (1) Dislike
Invite an expert to fact-check this
Part of the Northpark neighborhood of Irvine, a well-to-do, gated community built in the late 90s-early 2000s.
Drove through the gate, the neighborhood is really nice. The HOA cost (nearly $300) keep everything in tip-top shape; grass is trimmed, trees aren't over grown, and the streets are sparkling. blah blah...
59 Sparrowhawk Irvine, CA 92604
By Goran_K Follow (2) Tue, 13 Nov 2012, 9:12pm 306 views 11 comments
In Irvine CA 92604 Watch (1) Share Quote Permalink Like (1) Dislike
Invite an expert to fact-check this
This house is listed at $524,900, REO.
What attracted me to it was that it was a single story home, nearly 2,200sqft in a desirable area (Yale Loop in Irvine).
Walking up to the front door, it was obvious this home had some "deferred maintenance". The garage door had wood trim pieces literally hanging on by a single nail, there were two pieces of wood on the driveway. The grass was dead, and the windows looked like they needed to be sealed. Not a great first impression...blah
Goran_K's avatar is all over the "Open House" section. he's been actively looking to buy and posting reviews in that section for a while now. how could anyone not know?
what i would like to know is that why is he CURRENTLY shopping for a house while telling others that it's not a good time to buy ("over priced"), there's an collapse of the economy coming, and that "debt is slavery" and all that stuffs?
"Well, then are you an anarchist?"
Of course not, the government has a role in the Libertarian world; to ensure non-coercion, and protect against violence.
AFAIK, these are not precepts of an anarchist.
Not just that, also police, military, fire-fighters, state-parks/museums and hospitals and many more are on the list of things that are OK to be run by the government (with private competition in some areas but not all)
It's called window shopping. Did you even read what I said about the houses in my reviews that you posted?
Buying either of them was the furthest thing from my mind.
Not just that, also police, military, fire-fighters, state-parks/museums and hospitals and many more are on the list of things that are OK to be run by the government (with private competition in some areas but not all)
Exactly. Some schools even do favor public assistance for the destitute and poor (food and shelter, not $729,000 FHA loans).
I think the fact that some people equate libertarianism with some sick form of "left anarchism" shows how little people actually know what libertarianism is all about as a philosophy.
It's called window shopping. Did you even read what I said about the houses in my reviews that you posted?
Buying either of them was the furthest thing from my mind.
It's called window shopping. Did you even read what I said about the houses in my reviews that you posted?
Buying either of them was the furthest thing from my mind.
LIES.
it appears to me that you went there with the intention of BUYING if it was a good deal. turned out it wasn't. but that doesn't change the fact that you have been ACTIVELY LOOKING TO PURCHASE A HOME.
if you are looking to buy a house (even only if you got a good deal), why are you telling people that "debt is slavery" and that there's an impending economic collapse and homes are currently overpriced?
do you want everyone to stop buying so prices would drop so you would be able to jump in and buy for a very cheap price?
who would be concerned with cracks in the floor of the house if they had no interest in buying the house whatsoever?
Based on comps, if this home were fully remodeled, it might sell in the $640k to $660k range. It does back to Culver, but it's also 2,200 sqft on a single story plan (very hard to get in Irvine).
So based on the $524,900 list price + $80,000 out of pocket expenses to remodel, it looks like a good deal.
BUT....
"The cracks from the floor, going all the way to the ceiling are worrisome. Foundation issues always give me pause. The bank said they fixed it, but who knows? Will this home even get traditional financing? I'd love to see the inspection report on this house if someone does try to buy it. I have a feeling that there is some costly repairs I may be missing from my cursory tour last weekend
Discussions with R.E. Shills about over inflated prices can and is most certainly redundant and meaningless...
Try the ignore function,if it gets too much. It works really well.
Peter said the same thing in 2010, and 2011, but that didn't stop him from repeating it in 2012!
It also didn't stop his cult like followers from believing him!
Just keep pushing the date out, he will eventually be correct. Not sure if I would still be alive and a renter waiting for the impending crash. :)
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/crash-proof-peter-d-schiff/1112272915?ean=9781118038932
and here he is selling his book in 2010...
so what we have, is a charlatan with a terrible track record, selling a book, and investment program... but as demonstrated on this thread, there is a sucker born every minute!
You mean like he came on record on public TV in 2008 and was wrong? Oh wait! He was right! ;)
Peter said the same thing in 2010, and 2011, but that didn't stop him from repeating it in 2012!
It also didn't stop his cult like followers from believing him!
Just keep pushing the date out, he will eventually be correct. Not sure if I would still be alive and a renter waiting for the impending crash. :)
You know, being a couple of years off is still a good warning for the majority who overstretched themselves in an area that is not that liquid like housing. I think you will still be alive for his predicted debt crisis,, but you don't need to be Peter Schiff to figure out that there will be one ;)
You mean like he came on record on public TV in 2008 and was wrong? Oh wait! He was right! ;)
We all knew there was a housing bubble in 2005. Schiff was late to the prediction party. I knew there was a massive inventory build in Reno, NV in June, 2005.
Sure, I have never said that he makes the best calls. But it takes cojones to come on public TV warning about the crash, being laughed in the face while making a correct prediction (being late to the party or not) vs being a patnet poster croaking about the wrong calls of people they don't like after the fact ;) Plus, I am pretty sure he underestimated how massive (and criminal) the fed and government intervention would be. I know I did, looking back, instead of pouring a "just" sizeable amount into the market I would have leveraged myself to the hilt going all long financials! Oh wait, I pledged not to go long TBTFs.. ;)
Economic news from Bloomberg today:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-05/treasuries-extend-drop-as-payrolls-growth-supports-fed-tapering.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-05/bernanke-seen-holding-to-qe-tapering-plan-after-payrolls-report.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-05/dollar-climbs-as-u-s-employers-add-more-workers-than-forecast.html
Investors tied to the QE juice have to find a new game in town soon, so there will be some wiggles, but this is all very positive/good.
yes. His predictions are great, unless you want to see them actually happen!!!
They do happen. Would you say the Keynesians are better at predicting when or for the mater what?
keynesian prediction?
It is hard to discern one because Krugman types ambiguous. The one that comes to mind immediately is they predicted that after WWII if the government did not keep spending the great depression would continue. They were 180 deg wrong.
The other thought would be that booms and depressions could be leveled out. In the process of trying to accomplish this is what prolongs or causes the bubbles.
I have read some about Keynesian economics in reference to Monetarism and Austrian economics. It is does not make sense and more importantly practicing it is a liability to the economy.
Under clinton we had a surplus
Yes not that Clinton had anything to do with it.
Had it not been for the idiotic bush tax cuts
We have a spending problem.
The war was BS, but at the same time when you have N.Y. bombed you have to do something. Not that I'm going to defend Bush.
The biggest contributor to the current depression was the CRA, and the government spending behind it.
“Buffett once pointed out that during the years 1964-1982, the stock market went nowhere, even though GDP quintupled. But from 1982-1998, the stock market went up twentyfold, while GDP barely tripled. There are lots of reasons to explain market moves. GDP isn’t one of them."
GDP is a meaningless metric. It is much like the way mathematics has become equated with science in our time. Mathematical proofs are not scientific fact. If Xeno walks halfway to the wall again and again, mathematically he never reaches the wall. In reality he does...at Plank Length. Keep staring at the graphs of gov spending and GDP and you're guaranteed to break your nose as you walk straight into a wall.
No Mr Fife, the budget comes from congress of which O'Neill was the speaker
which means that it was controlled by the democrats during all of the Regan's
term.
Just for the record--there is no such position as Speaker of the Congress. O'Neill was Speaker of the House and, as such, had absolutely no power over the Senate (the other branch of Congress)
Just for the record--there is no such position as Speaker of the Congress. O'Neill was Speaker of the House and, as such, had absolutely no power over the Senate (the other branch of Congress)
The house is where the budget comes from. The 3rd most powerful person is DC is the speaker of the house. Remember Pelosi is the one who rammed Obama care through?
The 3rd most powerful person is DC is the speaker of the house
I'm assuming you are using the Presidential Succession Act as the basis for "power". I don't think that's a good judge of power. Biden is definitely NOT the 2nd most powerful person in Washington.
Regardless, you need a quick refresher on checks and balances. A budget must be approved by both the House and Senate before being signed by the President.
« First « Previous Comments 145 - 178 of 178 Search these comments
http://riehlworldview.com/2012/07/video-peter-schiff-the-coming-2013-2014-us-crash-will-be-worse-than-2008-and-europe.html
#politics