• Krugminator2's Avatar
    Today, 05:51 PM
    It makes absolutely zero sense to have a country make all of its own products. Zero. None. There is literally no argument for it. You can call it fascism or socialism. I don't care. They are two sides of the same coin. It is government controlling the means of production. And the result will be a dramatically lower standard of living. Prosperity and freedom are built on trade. Not to mention this is the complete opposite of a libertarian foreign policy. From Ayn 3:16
    55 replies | 541 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Today, 05:47 PM
    I am not sure where I stand on the Fed purchasing junk bonds. Seems like a bad idea and soft bailout to junk bond holders but maybe not. From a quick Google search they just bought junk bond ETFs which is what you said. Your reasoning wouldn't factor into at all whether it made sense to buy junk bonds. If you are buying a portfolio of high yield bonds, some are going to default. That's why they yield more. This isn't an untenable risk as you said. Over time the Fed will make more by owning junk bonds than regular corporate bonds whether they do any due diligence or not. That said, I can't articulate whether it makes sense to buy them or not buy them as part of monetary policy. It would seem this would be very distortionary to markets though but maybe it is necessary for liquidity.
    168 replies | 21638 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Today, 05:23 PM
    Using that logic what did we get with massive tariffs like being proposed in the original post? Oh yeah, the Great Depression and FDR.
    55 replies | 541 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Today, 05:16 PM
    Yes. Comrade. More socialism is the answer. We need to have a Great Leap Forward where we abandon individualism, reason, and live as one community. From each according their ability to each according to their needs. The cutthroat competition of a capitalist system where consumers ruthlessly choose the products they want needs to be replaced with love and Jesus. Who needs 20 brands of deodorant when you have starving kids? Amirite?
    55 replies | 541 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Today, 05:12 PM
    How about going back to the early 1900s with fewer tariffs than exist today and basically open immigration? Was the United States more or less free at that time? Since there was significantly more freedom, I win. No tariffs. Immigration for those who are self sufficient.
    55 replies | 541 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Today, 11:49 AM
    Findings from black Harvard economist who is also in the Freakonomics videos on Netflix https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html
    12 replies | 179 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:39 PM
    It is hard to understand who wouldn't happily be for massive tax increases that hurt lowest income earners the most.
    55 replies | 541 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Yesterday, 05:15 PM
    Nobody is being dug up though. They are just proposing removing Swastikas. Seems pretty non-controversial. I don't see this as any more political theater than any of the zillion things Ron Paul proposed. Thomas Massie's big thing was being able to drink raw milk. This seems about as a libertarian and about as important. I support allowing people to drink raw milk and Swastikas out of military burial sites. Neither one is all that important but may as well move things in the right direction.
    39 replies | 683 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Yesterday, 03:49 PM
    First of all this isn't a pressing issue. But what are you talking about? They are just proposing removing gravestones with Swastikas from VA cemeteries. This isn't political correctness. This is just pure evil. I mean what would be the argument for allowing these in the first place? The Nazis lost and isn't like there was anything remotely noble or redeeming about their cause. This isn't a heritage issue. There is nothing to be proud of. The cause the Nazis fought for was universally evil. I would be stunned if even one person votes against this.
    39 replies | 683 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:23 PM
    Sorry. This isn't Stormfront.
    39 replies | 683 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-25-2020, 05:51 PM
    Some random charts for to zero to one people who might be interested. "Trading stocks was among the most common uses for the government stimulus checks in nearly every income bracket, according to software and data aggregation company Envestnet Yodlee." https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/21/many-americans-used-part-of-their-coronavirus-stimulus-check-to-trade-stocks.html?__source=twitter%7Cmain Bored Day Traders Locked at Home Are Now Obsessed With Options https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-22/options-are-now-all-the-rage-for-bored-day-traders-locked-inside?sref=vuYGislZ 1263783153258414086
    137 replies | 10518 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-25-2020, 05:26 PM
    Totally agree with Wasserman-Schultz. If a private cemetery wants to allow that garbage, that is fine. Absolutely should not be allowed in a cemetery with other US troops who fought against the Nazis. Not sure how this is remotely controversial.
    39 replies | 683 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-23-2020, 04:18 PM
    Yes. Scam. Forex is impossible. Anyone says otherwise belongs in jail. The reality is almost nothing works. Here a not so secret secret. The overwhelming majority of people who make money working for themselves trading do so shorting penny stocks. There are other strategies that work but if you just make the simplifying assumption that anything other than shorting parabolic moves in junk stocks is a scam that will save you years of grief.
    5 replies | 347 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-22-2020, 05:12 PM
    "He's (Romney) going to put y'all back in chains.
    58 replies | 1034 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-21-2020, 05:26 PM
    Must be thinking of someone else.
    27 replies | 872 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-21-2020, 04:46 PM
    This always happens with unemployment benefits. When you pay people not to work many people will chose not to work. There was a decent argument for this to flatten to curve for few weeks but the House wants to keep this through the end of the year. And the Twitter left will scream about how heartless and stupid anyone who wants to cut these off is. Leftists are the most economically illiterate people alive. Morons all of them.
    27 replies | 872 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-19-2020, 04:24 PM
    There should be inflation in food prices because production slowed from the virus. This is a huge supply shock like the oil crisis in the 70s. More interesting, the country faced a threat larger than the Great Depression two months ago and the Fed launched a nuclear missile at the problem. I said the Fed was far too timid in 2008. This time the Fed basically said they would do whatever it takes to prevent a drop in incomes when the country opens up. I was very high on their action two months ago. People seem to have a lot of confidence in the Fed and as of right now the Fed looks like geniuses. Home demand has barely dropped. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/111702900 I truthfully can't believe this is going go smoothly but if they hold firm this Fed action might go down as the greatest policy achievement in US history. I will eat crow if they get this wrong. I wonder if Schiff, Ron, Jim Rogers, Zerohedge will do the same if this somehow turns out to be V shaped recovery.
    11 replies | 601 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 10:00 PM
    You did. 100% certain Completely different. Not at all the same actually. My definition of individual rights is the standard libertarian definition. You should be able to do whatever you want as long as you don't harm other people. What is amazing is you do support violating individual rights on a mass scale in order to promote your view of general welfare. Restricting a business from purchasing goods from China is a massive rights violation. You have a willing buyer and a willing seller you are all too happy to get between.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 09:36 PM
    You said laws against sodomy were constitutional. They aren't. They are tyrannical. And yes you are a bigot. Nope. I don't. Never have. And you will find zero instances of me making such claims. The phrase general welfare is not something I believe in. I support protecting individual rights. This is completely tyrannical nonsense. No half measure I have ever supported as a lesser evil is 1/1 millionth as anti-liberty as this paragraph.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 07:51 PM
    I support "unlimited" government in the context of protecting individual rights within a constitutional framework. What that means can't always be defined as in the examples I gave like the environment, pandemic, instances like banking or nuclear weapons where risks are unbounded so the courts will decide the nuances You support unlimited government in order to further your national socialist views. Whether that is limiting the speech of corporations like Twitter, Google and Facebook because they have different political views. Restricting immigration to push wages up. Tariffs to favor industries. Using government to persecute gays with sodomy laws.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 06:50 PM
    Like 90% of your posts related to policy violate the Constitution. You would be the first person on the chopping block in that guy's world.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 06:42 PM
    I am for an even stronger Constitution than most of the people on the forums and certainly Ron Paul. I don't think any local or state government should be able to outlaw drugs, prostitution, sodomy, contraception or any other activity without a victim. Like Mises, Hayek and Friedman I don't subscribe to the NAP except as a guideline. The issues arise when you have externalities which don't have a tidy solution. A pandemic is one issue. Pollution is another. Rothbard would shut down factories that pollute because pollution is aggression. Osan would say pollution is no big deal and one of life's risks. John Stossel would say regulate polluters. I would say you should let people pollute but tax them for incurring a cost on people to discourage pollution. Which one of us gets the death penalty in your vision if government? All four of us are using aggression in some form? What about owning nuclear weapons? The crazies on this forum think that is just great idea and limiting their ownership violates the right of self defense from government? Sane people would say letting Anwar Al Awaki (or anyone else) is probably not too smart because of the huge tail risk that involves How do you make a decision like that without cost benefit analysis? What about banking? There are large systemic risks under most systems. Rothbard would say fractional reserve banking should be banned as a result. Milton Friedman would say fractional reserve banking should be allowed but banks should be compelled to buy deposit insurance? Do both of them get the death penalty for a proposal that violates NAP? Does the current Constitution say anything about regulating banks?
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 03:11 PM
    Here's the problem. Many issues are complicated. I think anarchy is the worst tyranny imaginabinable. Many here would say it is the only freedom. Milton Friedman posed the very question: what if two people disagree on freedom? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtDM7VF3_Rc Your solution is to put them to death for treason. I, on the other hand, would say putting people to death for disagreeing on freedom is totalitarian and insane. Your conception of freedom would require infinite rules and contingencies for every imaginable situation. I would prefer a few big picture rules (not totally unlike the current Constitution) and let courts decide on difficult issues.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-17-2020, 01:37 PM
    I think you are being sarcastic but if not, he would NEVER win a governor's race even as a Republican. He would be a sacrificial joke candidate that Republicans put up in a lot of these gubernatorial and senate races like Pete Hoekstra and this John James guy who will lose by 20. Obviously someone chirped in his ear about this to influence this decision. Wonder what that the context was. This makes absolutely no sense. Gave up his House seat for nothing then changes his mind at the last minute for the LP nomination, which he certainly would have gotten. What does he even do now? Work for his family? Maybe the Cato Institute pays him something to do I have no idea what.
    33 replies | 909 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-15-2020, 01:51 PM
    It has worked quite well for the United States for 244 years and counting. Works well in Hong Kong, Switzerland. Lot of places. Seems very pragmatic. But maybe your doomer vision is correct and the US is about to collapse and anarchotopia is around the corner and will work just great.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-15-2020, 01:45 PM
    Except utilitarianism is the the complete opposite of utopian. I am a pragmatist and only care about what works in the context of a libertarian framework. The anti-government anarchists in this thread are utopian. Anarchy is an imagined ideal that has no possibility of working.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-15-2020, 01:36 PM
    Singapore isn't the freedom ideal but it does refute what you just said. Singapore was ruled by a dictator for decades who made every decision on cost/benefit and utilitarian grounds with no legal check on authority. The country is a technocracy. Worked and continues to work quite well. No catastrophic destruction yet. Per capita GDP was $300 a year 50 years ago and is $80k now. But maybe you are right that catastrophic destruction is right around the corner.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
  • Krugminator2's Avatar
    05-15-2020, 01:25 PM
    None. Cost/benefit decision Yes. Cost/benefit decision. It is morally justifiable now. I am strongly against it because I think the economic cost of a trillion dollars a month outweighs the value of lives saved. Not to mention I think it is dubious how many lives are saved by the lockdown. Kind of silly questions, stopping aggression is always justified. It just depends on the trade-offs.
    366 replies | 10181 view(s)
More Activity
About Krugminator2

Basic Information

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,665
Posts Per Day
1.72
General Information
Last Activity
Today 06:25 PM
Join Date
08-01-2014
Referrals
0

05-14-2020


04-10-2020


04-01-2020


03-24-2020


03-23-2020


03-18-2020


03-04-2020


03-02-2020


01-07-2020


08-05-2018


04-06-2018


03-17-2018


06-10-2017


No results to display...
Page 1 of 118 1231151101 ... LastLast

05-27-2020


05-26-2020


05-25-2020


05-21-2020


05-17-2020



Page 1 of 118 1231151101 ... LastLast