Teaching Economics to Liberals

[Xerographica]

Teaching Economics to Liberals (http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/123174-teaching-economics-liberals-class-session.html)...because somebody has to do it.

The quickest way to reveal somebody's understanding of economics is to ask them what would happen if we gave taxpayers the freedom to choose which government organizations they gave their taxes to. Their response will reveal whether they understand Bastiat's opportunity cost concept, Hayek's partial knowledge concept, Mises' human action concept and of course Smith's invisible hand concept.

Pragmatarianism is like libertarianism on Ritalin. It's all about ceteris paribus. It doesn't say anything about the tax rate...it doesn't say anything about the morality of taxes...it doesn't say anything about whether public education is a genuine public good or not. With laser light precision it focuses the debate simply by asking one question. All things being equal...what is the value of allowing 150 million of our most productive citizens to determine the distribution of public funds?

On this page...Unglamorous but Important Things (http://pragmatarianism.blogspot.com/2012/01/unglamorous-but-important-things.html)...I've compiled 67 responses to pragmatarianism. If you read through those 67 responses you should be able to clearly see exactly what obstacle libertarianism is up against. That obstacle is economic ignorance.

Your mission, should you choose to accept, is to help me use pragmatarianism to combat economic ignorance.

[messana]

Yes. I feel the vast majority of voters are too poorly informed on most issues of spending.
That's why we elect representatives/congress to make those decisions while we do our jobs.
And of course it's not just highways, but a Thousand other things.
AS I explained already.
You have no Real answer.
Congressman have staffs to be able to research each issue FOR Their constituents.

*sigh*

[Kluge]

Tell 'em to open up their own wallet voluntarily for their pet causes and their heads explode.

[Acala]

double post. Sorry

[Acala]

The basic premise of the sincere American democrat is that people are either too incompetent or too unethical to be left on their own and need government to make decisions for the incompetent and restrain the unethical. The great fallacy is exposed when you ask how a government composed of those same incompetent and unethical people will do better? In other words, the great democrat myth is that somehow the regulating agency is composed of a different class of humans than are more competent and more ethical than the people at large. There is absolutely no evidence that this has ever been true.

But the REAL truth is that government, and the special interests that control it, don't give a rat's ass about protecting the innocent or restraining the unethical. That is just the democrat cover story for the pillaging. The Republican cover story is law, order, and security.

[Xerographica]

Not sure if it's anybody from this forum...but somebody signed up and made some good points....JRSaindo's Arguments (http://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/123174-teaching-economics-liberals-class-session-7.html#post1060380183).

[JSaindon]

That was me. I'm basically a lurker at most places to read and sink in some knowledge/insight, but that thread interested me a lot, so I thought I would chime in. I like a healthy dialogue, it is the best way to knowledge and insight into others' perspectives.

[Xerographica]

That was me. I'm basically a lurker at most places to read and sink in some knowledge/insight, but that thread interested me a lot, so I thought I would chime in. I like a healthy dialogue, it is the best way to knowledge and insight into others' perspectives.

Hey! Thanks for chiming in! You should do it more often! If you haven't made your way down to the political philosophy section (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?288-Political-Philosophy) yet...perhaps some of the discussion there might be of interest as well.