Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[hack]

hack said:


I wasn't able to find your original post, Hack, but I was just pointing out that "tighter regulation" and "more market" are mutually exclusive phrases. I suspect we disagree on our definition of capitalism, but, to me, it is free people acting freely in the economic sphere. As we have discussed many times, I view man as evil, and capitalism as a system wherein men promote the common good by looking after their own sweet ass.

I completely disagree -- as long as corruption within government and the government/commerce nexus is monitored to ensure that regulation is about providing a level playing field, and nothing more. Which is how it should be. People can assign all sorts of value judgements to government, but the formal obligation, in the big picture, is to provide a level playing field.

I think one of the great errors in conservative thinking is the assumption that free markets and capitalism go together. In truth there is a natural tension between the two. Capitalists don't want free markets. It doesn't take long to come up with enough examples to see that it's true. The next discussion, if you accept that, is the extent to which regulation can be limited to ensuring a level playing field. As with anything, success is a matter of degree. Nothing involving humans is going to be perfect.

[Da Geezer]

a fair point.

I believe what you are saying is that, in a capitalist system, men try to form "combinations in restraint of trade". These combinations are loci of power and the government tries to counterbalance that power. You can guess my response, as always, is that anything that atomizes power is something I approve of.

[hack]

Yes, exactly. As always, I appreciate your thoughtful approach to the underlying principles.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Latest NY Poll shows Hillary winning NY by 12 points. Sanders with a slight lead with white voters, but Hillary with a big lead with minorities: for obvious reasons, like the Clintons being so in tune with the black community

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/11/hillary-clinton-bill-de-blasio/

Comes at a good time, just on the heels of Bill denouncing Black Lives Matter protestors as Republicans in disguise who support rapists and murderers.

Meanwhile on the Republican side: Armageddon

[WingsFan]

Sister Souljah moment for Bill Clinton

[Mike]

Good for him. Needed to be said. And while we're conducting hypothetical polls, how do think Bill would fair, if we're able to run, against the remaining clowns in the 2016 race? Electoral sweep with 80-90% of the popular vote?

[Hannibal]

If Bill ran today, he would have to run as a Republican and Millenial Liberals would be drawing Hitler mustaches on him.

[Mike]

Haha. That's probably true. But he'd still win!

[lineygoblue]

I think Reagan could have won a third term as well.

[Wild Hoss]

I think Reagan could have won a third term as well.

....as a Democrat.

[Hannibal]

Haha. That's probably true. But he'd still win!

I don't think that the Bill Clinton of 2016 would. Have you seen him speak lately?

[edindetroit]

....as a Democrat.

So an aged Reagan with Alzheimer's would make a good democrat?

[Da Geezer]

I think that the Reagan of 1984 and the Clinton of 1996 would both win if they ran today. The years from about 1983-1999 were the best economy I've seen in my life.

Ent found the quote:

If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today.

I never posted that because it is close to autobiographical. Clinton was a liberal when elected, but he surely would have been deemed a racist today. I think the success of both rested in their aversion to identity politics and their basic likability.

[Hannibal]

I think that the Reagan of 1984 and the Clinton of 1996 would both win if they ran today. The years from about 1983-1999 were the best economy I've seen in my life..

From about 1985 through the middle of 2008 was about a quarter century of almost uninterrupted growth and low inflation.

[entropy]

I think that the Reagan of 1984 and the Clinton of 1996 would both win if they ran today. The years from about 1983-1999 were the best economy I've seen in my life.

Ent found the quote:


I never posted that because it is close to autobiographical. Clinton was a liberal when elected, but he surely would have been deemed a racist today. I think the success of both rested in their aversion to identity politics and their basic likability.

He's being called a racist today based upon his response to the black lives matter crowd. Hillary is being blasted as well (and I think hers is justified.. that was preplanned and not a poor choice or words or misstatement..) But won't matter.. those offended will still vote D on election day.