View Poll Results: Are white supremacists/Nazis evil?

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes they are evil

    30 96.77%
  • No they are not

    1 3.23%
Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 338
Like Tree161Likes

Thread: Do you think white supremacists and Nazis are evil?

  1. #151
    International Captain Ausage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I'll show ye!!
    Posts
    6,689
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    It’s not true.
    I know. I spent several hours on that argument last night though. I'm tired.
    Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.

    Too many bones, not enough CASH!!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEHMbJ_FVfA
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5oGJTUpbpA

    RIP Craig

  2. #152
    U19 Debutant Munificent_Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by Ausage View Post
    Even if that's true, that's your view, not conservative's. That was my only point.
    Yeah but it's irrelevant. I didn't pretend to espouse their opinions of what their politics entail. And I'm not obligated to say what they think such policies eventuate in. I'm giving my opinion.
    Last edited by Munificent_Fool; 12-10-2017 at 07:02 AM.

  3. #153
    U19 Debutant Munificent_Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Itís not true.
    Yeah. It is. lol
    Uppercut likes this.

  4. #154
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,357
    No it's not lol

    Saying free markets don't exist is neither here nor there. The question is whether they can exist and the answer is yes. The problem with leftists is they have this strange, incorrect definition of free. By that definition they probably can't exist, but I'm more interested in real definitions than fake ones. That's just me, though.

    In terms of meritocracy, if you're talking literally in a governmental sense then of course it can't. If you're talking about society on a wider basis then of course it can. It's not to say it always does.
    Ikki and Ausage like this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Axl Rose
    The internet is a big garbage can


    RIP Craigos. A true CW legend. You will be missed.


  5. #155
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Uppercut's Avatar
    Tournaments Won: 1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    .
    Posts
    27,161
    I don't think any economist's definition of a fully free market is something that can literally exist. It's only supposed to be an illustrative metaphor. And a full meritocracy is obviously impossible. Uncontroversial to say that the world's unfairness isn't fully solvable.

    A much more interesting conversation would be about whether the meritocracy/freemarket myths are either true or useful approximations of reality in particular circumstances. I'm much happier accepting free-markets as an idea than meritocracy.
    Samuel_Vimes likes this.

  6. #156
    U19 Debutant Munificent_Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    No it's not lol

    Saying free markets don't exist is neither here nor there.

    The question is whether they can exist and the answer is yes. The problem with leftists is they have this strange, incorrect definition of free.
    Pray tell what definition is that exactly?

    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    By that definition they probably can't exist, but I'm more interested in real definitions than fake ones. That's just me, though.
    Condescension aside, do share your definition.

    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    In terms of meritocracy, if you're talking literally in a governmental sense then of course it can't. If you're talking about society on a wider basis then of course it can. It's not to say it always does.
    The two are inextricably connected.

  7. #157
    U19 Debutant Munificent_Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    I don't think any economist's definition of a fully free market is something that can literally exist. It's only supposed to be an illustrative metaphor. And a full meritocracy is obviously impossible. Uncontroversial to say that the world's unfairness isn't fully solvable.

    A much more interesting conversation would be about whether the meritocracy/freemarket myths are either true or useful approximations of reality in particular circumstances. I'm much happier accepting free-markets as an idea than meritocracy.
    Nah it can exist. For about 5 minutes before it collapses.

  8. #158
    Eternal Optimist / Cricket Web Staff Member GIMH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SWA
    Posts
    57,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Munificent_Fool View Post
    Pray tell what definition is that exactly?


    Condescension aside, do share your definition.


    The two are inextricably connected.
    Free market is where consumer need and demand, along obviously with supply drive the market and it is devoid of regulation, price controls, and all other such forms of tampering.

    I agree, FWIW, that societal outcomes are interdependent with government, that's a problem caused by government.

    In fact the more a market is interfered in the less meritocratic it becomes. There's a reason the biggest companies love regulations.

  9. #159
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    14,436
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    Nope.

    You will find many conservatives and even libertarians who recognise that such a system may result in "unfairness" - NOT just inequity (however you choose to describe either of those words). They just have less of a value placed upon fairness than they do freedom
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by hendrix View Post
    How am I using it as a universal term? Of course the word is nebulous. My dissatisfaction with the use of "rights" and "freedom" has nothing to do with this, it's to do with moral and legal frameworks.

    It's not simply inequity that can arise out of a free market system. It is naive to consider that unfair scenarios cannot be attributed to a free system. Concepts such as the physical limits of planet earth aren't exactly new or revolutionary and it's not difficult to see the unfairness that can accumulate as a result of commodities that are, in the long run, inelastic. One can also consider where the consequences and disincentives lie in such scenarios.
    Inequity can occur when there is fraud and things of this nature but that is why there are courts of law. Otherwise, it seems you've dropped a clanger here. Conservatives and libertarians by and large consider the free market the most fair in that sense that there are no arbitrary winners and losers.

    Do you actually have an example/argument that a free marketer would consider unfair?
    Ausage likes this.
    ★★★★★

  10. #160
    International Coach Ikki's Avatar
    Cricket Champion! Jackpot Champion!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Don't leave me Murph!
    Posts
    14,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    Most of the work I've seen on the subject is historical (because that's my field). There's some stuff on the problems friendship societies in pre-NHS Britain. As modern examples go, most developing countries don't have governments that offer disaster relief or disability services, so that might be a good place to start.

    I mean your argument is that in the absence of government, the private sector would figure out ways to do things better than the government could. That can't be disproven, although in a lot of cases there are very convincing theoretical reasons why it's unlikely. But the private sector has had plenty of opportunity to develop solutions to these things in the absence of government, all over the world, and it hasn't come up with anything that produces results comparable to a functional welfare state. I'm really open to creative solutions, but I'm not open to the argument that the market would inevitably find creative solutions. Sometimes there are no creative solutions to be found.
    The bolded is an oxymoron.

    Quote Originally Posted by Uppercut View Post
    I don't think any economist's definition of a fully free market is something that can literally exist. It's only supposed to be an illustrative metaphor. And a full meritocracy is obviously impossible. Uncontroversial to say that the world's unfairness isn't fully solvable.

    A much more interesting conversation would be about whether the meritocracy/freemarket myths are either true or useful approximations of reality in particular circumstances. I'm much happier accepting free-markets as an idea than meritocracy.
    America and Sweden pre 21st century are examples of it. It can happen in industries too, look at IT. Look what Friedman did in Chile? Even in stages of a free market, look at China a country that is communist more in religion than market.

    Having a free market is not a new idea, it has been argued for by intellectuals in economics since Adam Smith himself.
    Last edited by Ikki; 12-10-2017 at 11:29 AM.

  11. #161
    International Captain Ausage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I'll show ye!!
    Posts
    6,689
    Quote Originally Posted by Munificent_Fool View Post
    Yeah but it's irrelevant. I didn't pretend to espouse their opinions of what their politics entail. And I'm not obligated to say what they think such policies eventuate in. I'm giving my opinion.
    Hmm, that's not how I read your post then. Apologies.

    Anyway, I disagree

  12. #162
    International Captain Ausage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I'll show ye!!
    Posts
    6,689
    A conversation about Nazis devolves into a argument about the merits of the free market. Illustrates the problem pretty neatly imo

  13. #163
    Global Moderator Spark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    A Blood Rainbow
    Posts
    44,636
    Really not sure Friedman in Chile is a great example, unless this free market also involves people being dropped from helicopters at 5000ft.
    do you think people will be allowed to make violins?
    who's going to make the violins?

    forever 63*

  14. #164
    U19 Debutant Munificent_Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by GIMH View Post
    Free market is where consumer need and demand, along obviously with supply drive the market and it is devoid of regulation, price controls, and all other such forms of tampering.

    I agree, FWIW, that societal outcomes are interdependent with government, that's a problem caused by government.

    In fact the more a market is interfered in the less meritocratic it becomes. There's a reason the biggest companies love regulations.
    Well I'd drop the word "need" from that definition but otherwise it's a fair enough statement, broadly speaking. And this so called "leftist" definition is?

  15. #165
    U19 Debutant Munificent_Fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    312
    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    America and Sweden pre 21st century are examples of it.
    America does not have a free market economy and nor is it meritocratic. Their economy depends crucially on the state sector. Not to know this is to not even be in the discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    It can happen in industries too, look at IT.
    What on earth are you talking about? Yeah let's look at an industry which is driven by technology funded almost entirely by the public for over 40 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Look what Friedman did in Chile?
    lol what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikki View Post
    Having a free market is not a new idea, it has been argued for by intellectuals in economics since Adam Smith himself.
    Under very specific conditions did Smith argue for markets, the reasons for which he gave being mostly fallacious and fantasy.

Page 11 of 23 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. How evil are you?
    By Xuhaib in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 19-11-2009, 02:15 PM
  2. Evil
    By cover drive man in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 03-11-2009, 07:54 PM
  3. Stats are evil
    By pasag in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 21-09-2007, 11:22 AM
  4. Louis Theroux and the Nazis
    By Mr Mxyzptlk in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 04-04-2007, 12:19 PM

Posting Permissions

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