Tab Content
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Today, 02:58 AM
    On the eve of the first world war, US GDP was more than twice British, German, or Russian and was growing at a much higher rate. The destruction of Europe in two wars sped things along, but the US was already destined to be the greatest world power.
    18 replies | 566 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Today, 02:04 AM
    Many leftists (I won't endorse their word-theft and call them liberals) probably do suffer from 'pathological altruism,' but that isn't necessary to explain the continual growth of the welfare state. If you give a man an unlimited line of credit and tell him you'll pay the bill, his sudden transformation into a spendthrift doesn't require an ideological explanation. The politics of democracy lead inevitably to the welfare state. Leftist ideology is more an effect than a cause. If it didn't exist it would be necessary for the special interests to invent it, to rationalize their looting. Indeed, to a large extent, that's what actually happened.
    1 replies | 72 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Today, 12:08 AM
    ...which is why none of these schemes is a good, long-term solution. Aligning their incentives with whatever goal we have (increases in GDP, cuts in spending, whatever) doesn't accomplish much if they hold their jobs at the pleasure of people whose incentives aren't so aligned (i.e. voters and/or special interests). Think of the business world. You can pay a CEO in stock, but that doesn't do any good if the CEO serves at the pleasure of a board of directors who are paid a flat salary - the CEO will spend his time trying to please the board rather than trying to grow the company, even though it means lower income (lower income is better than getting fired). Hence, if you really want to make Congress responsible, nix elections and make them owners.
    21 replies | 207 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Today, 12:03 AM
    They're just doing their part to stimulate aggregate demand.
    4 replies | 55 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:48 PM
    It's definitely suspicious - not the kind of attack that could change anything, but big enough to make the news.
    4 replies | 55 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:23 PM
    I don't see why lobbying would be more expensive with a larger Congress. Sure, they'd have to physically visit more offices, have more dinners, etc, but that's minor. The real cost to purchase a Congressman is campaign contributions and/or outright bribes (or, by way of the stick, the cost to run attack ads etc), and the cost of these things per Congressmen would drop with an increase in the number of Congressmen, because each Congressman's importance would drop. This is why House races cost less than Senate races. It's not going to be exactly proportional, but basically if you double the number of Senators, for instance, you should expect the cost per Senator to fall by half, for the same cost to purchase a majority of Senators. ...which are less corrupt or spend less money?
    3 replies | 82 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:03 PM
    That would help, the Singaporean government does something like that with the bureaucrats. Better yet, convert the US government into a joint stock company and divide the shares amongst them. Then they'd be owners with rational incentives to increase the value of their property. ...rather than despoilers of a commons, as they are now.
    21 replies | 207 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:44 PM
    Which will cost how much? If you want to avoid that, you could just eliminate compensation altogether - which was the historical norm in many places. But it doesn't really matter. Not paying them or paying them less won't improve their behavior (if anything, the opposite), and the pay itself is a pittance.
    21 replies | 207 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:41 PM
    "We will not have any more crashes in our time." - Keynes, 1927
    8 replies | 146 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 10:35 PM
    I stared at the OP for about five minutes trying to make sense of it before I realized the title refers to federal senators and reps... Anyway, having the states provide congressional pay wouldn't really make a difference IMO: not just because the amounts are trivial, but because the states have an incentive to grease their congressmen anyway, to get them to bring home the bacon, so it's not clear that pay would actually decline. It might even increase, as there would likely be less public scrutiny if compensation decisions were made at the state level.
    21 replies | 207 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:55 AM
    That prize belongs to the bond market, treasuries in particular.
    22 replies | 786 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:52 AM
    These aren't especially large banks, about $60 billion in assets combined, but, yes, dominos possibly. By contrast, Lehman Brothers held $639 billion in assets at the time it collapsed.
    1 replies | 90 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    Yesterday, 12:18 AM
    The title is extremely dishonest. The Swedish Police Chief said absolutely nothing about civil war. The only claim about civil war is from some "research expert," who has no connection to Swedish law enforcement at all. Likewise with the claim about Islamist gangs "taking over" large territories. All the police say is that there are high crime areas (these are not ruled by anyone other than the Swedish state and are not "no go zones" as Swedish police themselves have repeatedly said). It's again a "research expert" who slyly translates this into Islamist gangs seizing territory. The article Danke posted is the same. It infers that 150,000 girls have suffered genital mutilation in Sweden, when the real figure is that 150,000 girls in Sweden have experienced genital manipulation (i.e. at some point, somewhere, presumably before they arrived in Sweden) - tricky, eh? Basically, both sources posted are obvious, low quality propaganda.
    9 replies | 165 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-26-2017, 11:24 PM
    With his former boss's timely demise, Watters is now the most irritating fucktard on television.
    5 replies | 140 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-26-2017, 11:09 PM
    From elsewhere on the monument The fasces had a different meaning pre-Mussolini, so you can't take just any fasces as having that meaning (e.g. the 18th century sculpture of Washington in the capitol has a fasces), but these particular fasces were designed in 1920, just when Mussolini was gaining popularity; the monument was actually unveiled the year Mussolini marched on Rome. The designer had spent considerable time in Italy, co-founding the American Academy in Rome and receiving various awards from Italian institutions. The carvers were themselves Italians. Looking back at Lincoln's policies, the fascists of the 20s liked what they saw, I'd wager. Our modern fascists certainly do.
    28 replies | 397 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-26-2017, 10:24 PM
    Him first Note the bundles of rods Abe's gripping. Those are fasces, symbols of state power in ancient Rome, from which the term fascism derives. Very apt
    28 replies | 397 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-26-2017, 10:07 PM
    Yup, the Dems aren't going anywhere. Though it wouldn't really matter if they did, the important ideological battle having been lost a long time ago. The parties are just competing freeshit distribution systems rousing their respective rabbles with culture war propaganda. I'd gladly vote for the wierdosexual party if they adopted something resembling laissez faire.
    60 replies | 867 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-26-2017, 09:32 PM
    The best outcome might be for this crap to pass over Rand and Lee's objection, pushed through by Pence, and for Trump and other leftist GOPers to own it, lose the mid-term anyway, and then have a Randward revolution in the party by 2020. Course, that means we have to live with the crap for the next several years, but that might be a price worth paying.
    45 replies | 1076 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-26-2017, 08:08 PM
    Rand won't fold. Assuming the "moderates" do, that leaves three, and Lee's the decisive vote IMO. If he sticks with Rand, so will Cruz, as he won't want to be the sole guy responsible for passing it. If Lee folds, Cruz will too, since he's up for reelection next year and (short term) it's probably easier to pass than oppose.
    45 replies | 1076 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-17-2017, 09:36 PM
    4325 replies | 205596 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-17-2017, 08:22 PM
    I took a personality test once. They said I passed.
    15 replies | 348 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-17-2017, 07:49 PM
    We could avoid all kinds of risks by deporting you and other Trumpkins. So, there's that. ...I hear Australia's nice this time of year.
    157 replies | 3728 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-16-2017, 10:32 PM
    Shameful ...I'm disappointed.
    323 replies | 8381 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-16-2017, 10:10 PM
    How about that Russia sanctions vote? Where was Lee, doesn't like basement or what?
    323 replies | 8381 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-16-2017, 09:56 PM
    One (1) Randal, being a Senator, is worth several FC House members. If the bolshevik really wanted to kill pro-market reformers, sounds like he fucked up. I hope hell exists.
    323 replies | 8381 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-16-2017, 09:37 PM
    Never hurts Anyway, who if anyone did this jackass target? Do you really think it was Rand? If so, why?
    323 replies | 8381 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-16-2017, 08:50 PM
    https://mises.org/library/truth-about-tulipmania Bubbles are necessarily "constrained to certain sectors." That's the whole point. The state cannot will new resources into existence. Resources are redirected from one sector (that which better satisfies consumer demand) to another (that which profits politicians/lobbies).
    63 replies | 1569 view(s)
  • r3volution 3.0's Avatar
    06-16-2017, 12:45 PM
    The state's intervention in the market always causes misallocations of resources, which, when large enough, we call bubbles (the correction of the misallocation being the bust). Now, while it's conceivable (i.e. not logically impossible like a square circle) that bubbles could form in a free market (e.g. a very large number of entrepreneurs could spontaneously make the same miscalculations for no apparent reason), it's highly unlikely. Can you cite any example of the latter? Any historical boom-bust cycle which was not caused by state intervention in the market (typically either monetary or fiscal)? In any event, even if boom-bust cycles did form on rare occasions in the free market, that's no justification for creating many additional boom-busts cycles through state intervention.
    63 replies | 1569 view(s)
More Activity

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
9,888
Posts Per Day
8.18
General Information
Last Activity
Today 03:19 AM
Join Date
03-06-2014
Referrals
0

05-27-2017


05-11-2017


11-19-2016

  • 06:12 PM - Hidden

07-25-2016


06-16-2016


No results to display...
Page 1 of 132 1231151101 ... LastLast

06-28-2017


06-27-2017


06-19-2017


06-18-2017


06-17-2017


06-16-2017


06-15-2017



Page 1 of 132 1231151101 ... LastLast