Page 5 of 23 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 224

Thread: Paleo And Politics page 5

  1. #41
    john_e_turner_ii's Avatar
    john_e_turner_ii is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Flower Mound, Texas
    Posts
    2,104
    The Founding Fathers broke the law and committed treason against the government at that time. Now, average citizens are expected to obey the laws that the founders created, while the elite have the money and power to get around these laws. Sounds familiar...

  2. #42
    Cryptocode's Avatar
    Cryptocode is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norco, California
    Posts
    1,341

    Post

    Quote Originally Posted by itchy166 View Post
    I think eating Primal is a huge political statement. Its the rejection of corporate/consumerism, along the same lines as avoiding banks, buying used clothing, gardening, hunting, turning off your TV, home schooling, etc.

    As the movement grows, look for more and more articles attacking the lifestyle, and/or watch governments try and stop it (unpasteurized milk in the U.S. or ridiculous marketing standards for vegetables in the EU for example).

    There isn't a government on the planet that wants a population of independent, clear-headed, strong, healthy Groks running around....
    In fact I'd not thought of connecting paleo with politics, but now that you ask I think Itchy has it right here.

    I was born into a Military family so I began as a Republican, before the days of neo-cons. I was very active in Goldwater's campaign and was very sorry he lost.

    After that I was busy completing my PhD, getting married, having children and beginning my career. I didn't seriously think about national politics again until I retired. We used to have a social understanding that each person should "do his civic duty" and that our society was one containing a wide variety of civil institutions and organizations.

    My husband and I each did our "civic duty" as did our friends. In our state, all offices below the state level are non-partisan. He was mayor for 12 years, I was planning commissioner for city, county, and sub-state. Then enough was enough, we had performed our civic duties to the best of our abilities and had never been in it for riches or power.

    Today even those concepts "civil duty" and "civil societies" are completely gone, along wilth most civil institutions. Over the years I voted for both party presidents fairly evenly, and learned not to trust either party.

    After retirement I studied economics for 6 years and that really opened my eyes. In the US there are basically 3 schools of economics, Keyensian (at most Ivy league schools), Monetary (the Chicago School) and Austrian (the Von Mises Institute - which is now expanding to many southern Univs). They have a site - mises.org. The Austrian school is also very active in teaching HS and undergraduate students classical economics and classical-liberal history and economic history. As a mathematician and physicist I cannot accept the math and statistics used by the Keyensians and Monetarists.

    But I do think Obama has an idea there, in his $1T coin. If we can have the Chinese buying our completely worthless dollars now, maybe they will take the cool-aid coin. I shows Obama has accepted reality.

    After this education, no more neo-lib or neo-con for me. I'm a Libertarian, and further, an anarcho-capitalist. I think our history, along with that of many other attempts at limited fovernment, proves that limited government is impossible. Once started, like cancer, there is no stopping the monster from growing eternally.



    So now, I have a question for you all. What would our country look like under the perfect conditions you would create if you were God or Totally Magic?

    Somehow, I think that Paleo people are going to be more similar than not on this.

  3. #43
    Rojo's Avatar
    Rojo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptocode View Post
    After retirement I studied economics for 6 years and that really opened my eyes. In the US there are basically 3 schools of economics, Keyensian (at most Ivy league schools), Monetary (the Chicago School) and Austrian
    How about Marx? I don't see how you can fully accept "free market" capitalism if you haven't studied it's most trenchant critic. Due diligence.

  4. #44
    Primal Bill's Avatar
    Primal Bill Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by john_e_turner_ii View Post
    The Founding Fathers broke the law and committed treason against the government at that time. Now, average citizens are expected to obey the laws that the founders created, while the elite have the money and power to get around these laws. Sounds familiar...
    This is by far the dumbest comment I have ever read on this forum

  5. #45
    Cryptocode's Avatar
    Cryptocode is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norco, California
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Rojo View Post
    How about Marx? I don't see how you can fully accept "free market" capitalism if you haven't studied it's most trenchant critic. Due diligence.
    Yes, I also studied Marx. Marx is taught in all 3 schools. But Marx was in error, which occured early in his analysis. It goes like this:

    The inputs are 3 factors, Rents (or land), labor, and materials. The output, or product, is sold ( a risk factor here) at a price higher than the sum of the 3 input factors. Marx attributes the gain or profit to an unrecognized additional labors' input, and does not attribute it to the organizations' owner or originator, the person who rented and supplied the materials, and hired the laborers and paid them while they were working.

    Consider, The owner paid the laborers before the product was sold. If the laborer wants to make something by first saving some of his pay, using that saved money to buy materials without any return pay at that time, then sell the product and finally get his return on his investments, he is welcome to do so.

    Marx never included interest on investment. In fact he didn't really believe in interest. That owner we speak of could have not been an entreprenour but instead invested his money as a share of someone else's enterprise and probably gained the same return on investment (interest). But then the laborer would never have been hired.

    Marxian economice is taught as a full degreed course at U.C. Berkley if you're interested.

  6. #46
    Urban Forager's Avatar
    Urban Forager is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    3,187
    Cryptocode, What's the difference between Libertarian and Anarcho-Capitalist? Isn't that just a free-market capitalist?

  7. #47
    Cryptocode's Avatar
    Cryptocode is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norco, California
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by Urban Forager View Post
    Cryptocode, What's the difference between Libertarian and Anarcho-Capitalist? Isn't that just a free-market capitalist?
    Yes, all Libertarians are free-market capitalists. Anarcho-Capitalist is a sub-set of Libertarianism. Rather it is a question of the structure of society. Most Libertarians want limited, small government, typically both geographic states and Federal Gov't. In fact there is a wide variety of types of Gov't deemed ideal, not always liberal.

    Anarcho-Capitalists want no gov't. Gov't would be entirely replaced by private enterprizes. The private courts and laws would be all based upon the Non-agression principle. (Basically and in very short, the person who agresses first is the criminal.)

    I find it a bit strange that people today generally immediately rebel against the idea of no Gov't, believing that the word 'anarchism' is synonomous with chaos. Yet today, freeways are being built by 'for-profit' companies, security is preformed by 'for-profit' companies, lawyers are certainly 'for-profit', a growing number of elementary and secondary schools are 'for-profit' companies, jails and prisons are operated by 'for-profit' companies, etc., and no one objects.
    Last edited by Cryptocode; 01-23-2013 at 08:51 PM.

  8. #48
    Cryptocode's Avatar
    Cryptocode is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Norco, California
    Posts
    1,341
    Consider the advantages of Anarcho-Capitalism.

    1. The revolving door (elected congressional officals and private lobbyists ), highlighted in the Warren Buffet film above, could not exist, there would be no one Gov't official to lobby.

    2. The strong sway of special-interest activists would not be possible. We could each make our own decisions.

    3. Private companies would not be able to grow so large, nor to be global. To do that requires Gov't-favoring laws and subsidies: GE, GM, Misrosoft, etc. No company would be able to avoid pure competition.

    4. Best of all, there would be no Central Bank. Hurray! We could have our own money again, as we did in the beginning of our country. No Gov't would exist to debase it by taxing or subtrafuge.

    5. States could by choice still have militias (private), and we could still have our National Military if we wanted, by volunteering perhaps 5% of our income.

    6. Police (security) would be private and by choice. Today, with so many cities out of money, many are hiring private policing services already.

    7. The USDA, FDA, and CDC would no longer exist. We could eat what we want, and private, small, local companies would respond to that desire.

  9. #49
    Rojo's Avatar
    Rojo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by Cryptocode View Post
    The output, or product, is sold ( a risk factor here) at a price higher than the sum of the 3 input factors. Marx attributes the gain or profit to an unrecognized additional labors' input, and does not attribute it to the organizations' owner or originator, the person who rented and supplied the materials, and hired the laborers and paid them while they were working.
    I guess the above is about surplus value, which Marx thought came from the worker getting paid less than the value he creates. I'm not sure what's "wrong" about this idea. I'd think now it's a given.

    Consider, The owner paid the laborers before the product was sold. If the laborer wants to make something by first saving some of his pay, using that saved money to buy materials without any return pay at that time, then sell the product and finally get his return on his investments, he is welcome to do so.
    Well, the worker is "welcome to do so" but good luck with that if you don't have any money. And the worker actually "forwards" his labor to the boss before getting any pay. In effect he gives the capitalist an interest-free sweat loan.

  10. #50
    Rojo's Avatar
    Rojo is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    800
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Am I more free when a rent-a-cop is beating on me or when I sit in a private jail?

Page 5 of 23 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •