With the exception of “life forms” that can survive processing basic elements to sustain life, the description of being “parasitic” would be equally applicable.

Homo sapiens sapiens being at the top of the food chain would seem then to qualify as
the ultimate parasite…….

Since you have omitted capitalism from your list, what kind of host does it require to survive?

Galt,
Capitalism is sustainable. Communism consumes it’s host leaving behind a lifeless carcass.

Example: When Russian satelite states were cut loose it was because maintenence was costing more than the wealth being stolen. Unbenounced to the people, they are being allowed to rebuild their countries wealth much the same as a farmer lets played out soil to go fallow in order to replenish it’s productiveness. In our lifetime we will see the tanks roll back in, and once again the parisite will reaquire the host when it is profitable to do so.

Capitalism has two main components — Private Ownership, and Voluntary Transactions between the people with no restraints from Government other than to litigate against Fraudulent operators.
Only the most deluded type of people could consider that to be Parasitic.

Do not confuse Capitalism with the modern day economy of the US which is mostly Socialistic.

Communism is government ownership / goverment control. Fascism is private ownership / government control. To people I don’t know of any difference. Man is profit motivated. Communism kills that. Fascism gives man an illision of ownership so fascist States tend to prosper a little better then communist state. A state where liberty reigns supreme and a man can decide for himself how much he can prosper is by far the best. Wittness the “Old” America vs. the “New” Amerika

Socialism has two parts, voluntary and involuntary. In a voluntary state the people take care of their own without goverment intervention through churchs, The Salvation Army and their like. In an involuntary socialist state, government takes the wealth of the people and uses it to plan a mans life for him. Communistic and fascist governments are examples of involuntary socialism. America at it’s beginning is an example of voluntary socialism.

So basically, you can not describe the nature of the host capitalism requires, and since
no actual capitalist society exists which meet DavidH criteria, I guess we can look at the reality which does not seem to be a lifeless husk……

The current state of the world economy is a product of “capitalism” of the type that would meet the criteria of DavidH, free market, unregulated, and comprised of entirely voluntary transactions………and it doesn’t matter if the attempt is made to label it as something else…the elements that comprise DavidH definition, are all present.

This was accomplished by the repeal of Glass Stegal…..at the urging of the Capitalists, and while DavidH may call them crony, but their actions were done in precisely the environment which DavidH presents as a Magical solution to the current problem….
when most can see that it is the CAUSE of the current problem……

Unbelievable.
First Galt says — “since no actual capitalist society exists which meet DavidH criteria, I guess we can look at the reality which does not seem to be a lifeless husk”.
I guess that was yet another attempt by Galt to disparage me since he can’t debate on a factual basis.
Then Galt says — “The current state of the world economy is a product of “capitalism” of the type that would meet the criteria of DavidH, free market, unregulated, and comprised of entirely voluntary transactions”.
You just lost all credibility, Galt (not that you had any with me to begin with), with that statement. Anybody who has done any study at all knows that the world is far away from Free Markets. And for good reason — Leaders can’t feather their own nests and those of their Cronies in Free Markets.
Then Galt says — “This was accomplished by the repeal of Glass Stegal…..at the urging of the Capitalists, and while DavidH may call them crony, but their actions were done in precisely the environment which DavidH presents as a Magical solution to the current problem”.
The Glass Steagall Act was instituted primarily by the Rockefeller Cronies with purpose to hobble the Morgan Empire. Anybody, who cares to understand the truth of the politics of Glass Steagall, can read this book to understand that and much more about our Government’s efforts to reward themselves, their cronies, and punish their wealthy rivals:
http://mises.org/Books/historyofmoney.pdf
And, Galt, when you say — “their actions were done in precisely the environment which DavidH presents as a Magical solution to the current problem” — That is an outright Lie. Anybody who has spent any time reading my comments knows that. But then I guess being a Progressive you can’t help yourself, can you Galt?

Sorry David……you say that capitalism is free markets and voluntary transactions…..the
institutions that engaged in the activity which resulted in the present economic conditions
and the bailouts operated under precisely those conditions……when you can demonstrate
that this is not true, then you will have made a point…….as stated previously, labeling them crony capitalists does not alter the conditions in place. See how easy this all becomes when you actually understand what is being said? Not that I actually think you do comprehend much of anything, including the meaning of your own words…….and your time has expired here also.

As usual Galt, you must try to manipulate me with personal attacks in lieu of facts.
The housing collapse was the result of several factors — all of which were driven by Government. There was the Federal Reserve printing their funny money, the Government Meddling via the CRA and its progeny, Fanny and Freddie encouraging shoddy loans, the Bank Bailouts which create moral hazard, and other factors which I can’t remember at this point. But all were a result of Big Government meddling.
You should try doing more reading, Galt, and think about what you read because at this point anybody with half-a-brain can understand why you must personally attack instead of providing the facts.
Your delusions of Grandeur are a figment of your imagination.

Tsk, tsk, David H

Once again: the derivatives market was responsible for the crash, which were financial products created by investment banks and were unregulated.

How were these markets not free? How were these transactions not voluntary?

Since these are the two conditions for the capitalist system which according to you ‘never’
existed, it would appear that again you are in error…….and you have seen the results of what happens in your “perfect world”.

The derivatives market, also extends to far more than those involved in the housing bubble, since current levels of outstanding derivatives is 780+ TRILLION dollars, all created in an unregulated free market and sold in voluntary transactions……ain’t capitalism grand?

As you can see, disparaging you is unnecessary……?

There’s no such thing as capitalism. There’s consumptive, capital and money ( a medium of exchange. A baker bakes bread. if he eats it, it’s consumptive. If he sells it, it’s a capital item along with the tools to bake bread. A builder builds a house to live in, it’s consumptive. If he sells it, the house was capital item, along with the tools to build it. The baker gets money for his capital, bread, to buy, consume, a house. The builder sells the house and uses his money to buy bread to consume. For man to exist he needs consumptive items. For man to exist, he needs capital item. Money is a convenience, not a necessity. He could barter for his needs.

Capital items are needed for man to exist and prosper. The term capitalism was coined by Karl Marx primarily out of jealousy of people having more capital items than him. Man himself is a capital, hopefully, productive item. Tools, like man, produce things. Depending on how he uses his capital, himself, he will either prosper or decline. We use our capital items to get money. The amount of money we make for our efforts dictates on how much or many items we can purchase.

Eric says — “Capitalism is not sustainable on a finite planet with finite resources and an ever larger population”. Yet he offers no proof of his conjecture, or even some weak logic.
One thing is certain — Real Capitalism (not the mostly Socialistic environment we have today) is MORE sustainable than any other system yet devised.
All we need do is look at the reality of Big Government. The Bigger it gets, the further we get away from Real Capitalism, and the further we get away from a good economy:
http://heritage.org/index/ranking
Eric and his crowd offer us the very same medicine that has resulted in Poverty around the world. Somehow they think it will be different next time.

Eric says — “Capitalism in it’s present form is a ponzi scheme”.
There are two problems with that statement.
1) The Present Form is NOT Capitalism. It is mostly Socialism which, coincidentally, Eric and his fellow Progressives advocate for.
2) Real Capitalism is NOT a Ponzi Scheme. Socialism IS a Ponzi Scheme and it fails when the Progressives run out of other peoples’ money (OPM).

Eric says — “In a social democracy you can have the best of both world. Capitalism and free markets (hopefully), and as it’s people have chosen, public services like healthcare, education, retirement, and protection of the common wealth”.
You CANNOT have Free Markets at the same time you are stealing money from other people to provide “public services”. They are incompatible.
The “common wealth”? And who gets to determine how that “common wealth” is used? Certainly not the “common man”. Of course the Elite (apparently Eric thinks he is one) would love that situation because, being the administrators of that “common wealth”, they would be the ones who could use it most.

And then Eric goes on a tirade about Wall Street, some of which is true, but I think Eric is confused about which part because he thinks we are a Capitalistic Society, which we are NOT. Crony Capitalists (despite the name) and their Crony Politicians are NOT part of Capitalism. And the irony of that is that the very same Big Government, that Eric and his Progressives espouse, is what enables the abuse of Capitalism. As Government Grows Corruption Flows.
What other kind of logic can we expect from a person who thinks that Free Markets (Voluntary Trade) are compatible with the Involuntary Taking of peoples’ money to provide “public services”?

The DaveH attack dog is vigilant as ever. Of course once again he offers nothing new but the old regurgitations from Mises and Heritage Foundation, a Koch Bothers founded pretend Think Tank.

DaveH knows that Capitalism is not sustainable and plain common sense is the only logic needed since Capitalism is based on perpetual growth. Will people invest if there is no perpetual growth? Can you have perpetual growth with finite resources? Has anyone thought about the fact that we are running out of rare earth minerals, top soil, water, fish, forests, oil…. Is everyone asleep? Google it yourself. The sh!t is hitting the fan. The perfect storm is here.

It’s amazing to me that DaveH will be the first to profess that capitalism is the best system but yet it never works and every time it blows up, then you claim it is not being done correctly, and what we really have now is socialism. I partly agree with you Dave. When we the people are FORCED to bail out the Too Big To Fail Corprations that’s really a corrupt form of socialism. Capitalism as in profits for the corporations, tax loop holes galore so they don’t have to pay taxes on record profits and when things go wrong WE THE PEOPLE bail them out. And your conservative capitalist group is solely responsible for that debacle with their lobbyists and deregualtions. My progressive left ideology has had nothing to do with that ever!

Real socialism is when WE THE PEOPLE DECIDE to have empathy and we the people will make sure that everyone is educated, has access to a job, access to universal healthcare and no one is homeless or goes hungry and anyone who has worked their whole life is taken care of in their old age.

What DaveH neglects to ever mention is that his theoretical real capitalism has never been and can never be practiced and the free market is never free either. Why? Because greedy corrupt people are always involved. Ayn Rand was a sociopath and she got it wrong.

I will add that Free Global Markets are a bad idea that only serve to make the rich richer. We should go back to protectionist tariffs so that we can rebuild our manufacturing industries and protect all of our resources and industries.

I guess Dave has no comprehension of what common wealth is. Common wealth is our oil, our coal, our trees, land, water. It needs to be better managed and protected. Corporations should pay higher royalties for access to it and they should pay penalties when they they mismanage and abuse/pollute our common wealth. They have bribed our politicians to give this stuff away.

Connect the dots. One of our favorite foreign policy is to overthrow governments that ever try to nationalize their common wealth. That’s why we overthrew Mosaddeq in Iran and put in the Shah dictator. Mosaddeq had the nerve to try and nationalize the iranian oil for the Iranian people. Imagine the nerve. After all the British stole it and we should support the thieves.

It never ceases to amaze me how short sighted and mean people, who love profits over people, can be.

Obama is not a muslim and he is not a socialist. Sometimes I wish he was.

DaveH and his ideology are why we are in trouble and since it is all coming to a head he is desperate to try and get people to buy more of his lies.

It’s 2012 but it’s not armageddon or the end is near. We are birthing a new society, one that will be about sharing and cooperation. We are in the birth canal and the new born is freaking out having second thought about coming out and facing this new world. But there is no turning back. This is a good thing. All it takes is a little faith.

Too many lies for me to dispute this late in the day, Eric.
One of the first, Eric says — “since Capitalism is based on perpetual growth”.
It is? Since when, Eric? Since you and your lying Progressives said so?
Also Eric says — “It’s amazing to me that DaveH will be the first to profess that capitalism is the best system but yet it never works and every time it blows up”.
It never works, Eric? Perhaps you could name some failures of Real Capitalism?
I provided a list to prove the failures of your Progressive Socialism. How about you do the same? First you evil Progressives stifle our Free Markets with your Progressive crap, then when the results prove to be unworkable you have the huevos to blame them on Capitalism. How convenient, supporting your lies with more lies. I’m sorry, Eric, but I can’t compete with you in that department because I have made my life one of honesty.

For those who would like to understand what Capitalism really is, why it would work, and free of the clutter of lying Progressive attacks, please read this:
http://library.mises.org/books/Kel%20Kelly/The%20Case%20for%20Legalizing%20Capitalism.pdf

Do you ever proof-read your own comments, Eric?
First Eric says — “It’s amazing to me that DaveH will be the first to profess that capitalism is the best system but yet it never works and every time it blows up”.
Okay, let’s say Eric knows what he’s talking about and it “never works”.
Then Eric says — “What DaveH neglects to ever mention is that his theoretical real capitalism has never been”.
Now, according to Eric real Capitalism “has never been”. Yet earlier he said it “never works”. Please explain to us, Eric, how something that “has never been” has “never worked”? Good Grief, Eric, do your Progressive sheeple buy that crap when you spew it at work or play?
What an ignoramus.

Here’s another Eric classic — “It never ceases to amaze me how short sighted and mean people, who love profits over people, can be”.
Yeah sure, Eric, you love people. Especially their wallets. With lovers like you, who needs enemies? You’re nothing but a common thief, Eric. Don’t put yourself on a pedestal.

Here is the US Constitution for comparison:
https://www.cato.org/constitution/constitution_en.html

John Adams said… ” This Constitution is for the governance of a religious and moral people. It is unfit for the governence of any other” Enough said.

“Obama is doing far more than anyone is giving him credit for.” . . . . LOL
The US has only a few years to right the ship of fools that the “O” is steering . . . as the borrowing and printing continue . . . there will be a point where the devaluation of the currency will create forced Austerity . . . then even the clueless like Flashey will be in the game. As the dollar buys less and less, pensions shrink, welfare and food stamps disappear, cities and even states (mostly Dimmicrap) file for bankruptcy (already starting).
Europe is toast . . . but 4 more years of the “O” will make the US Europe II . . .

Dale, you’re wrong.
Flashman is not clueless. He’s devious, and he’s dishonest, but he’s not clueless. But he is counting on those who read his comments to be clueless, because the clueless ones are the only people who would give any credence at all to his propaganda.

Neither Gov. Romney, President Obama, or Congressman Ron Paul are muslim, nor are they communists. So your point is?

BTW..with all the birther nonesense spouted, and the “Constitutional requirements’ yelled about….how ’bout ol’ Marc Rubio being touted as the lead candidate for Romney’s VP selection !

To Gordon:
How stupid. This is why Obama will win again. To Flashy, we disagree on alot of things but this time, you’re, unfortunately, right!!

Gordon,
Romney is not Muslim, but he is certainly a progressive globalist who will continue to grow government and the debt your great, great grandchildren will be liable for.

Ron Paul 2012

Tony says,
“How stupid. This is why Obama will win again”

No, what’s stupid is allowing yourself to be spoon fed MSM propaganda and voting based on their lies.

The people MSM and the current oval occupiers fear the most are the ones they try to marginalize out of hand. The ones who would strike the death nil to their status quo orgy.

Ron Paul 2012

Flashy,
Your quaint foibles concerning eligibility are so old that I think Tyrannosaurs and Triceratops were among the first to disprove and get a belly laugh from them.

Do you lie awake at night dreaming of being appointed White House Schill Czar? Don’t hold your breath.

Most who blog as much as you can expect their skills to improve and therefore become more convincing, that is unless they are natural born dunderheads.

Flash, I just can’t take anymore of your insanity. “Obama did not increase spending, he kept it stable. (true…the lowest increase in spending in modern presidencies.” when you cited this, I realized you are total idiot. This statement is so untrue not even Obama repeated it more than twice. The math doesn’t add up and Bush isn’t responsible for Obama’s wasteful spending. Reagan had to create a small deficit to make up for the destruction of our Military by Carter and in order to take down Communism (until Obama). Under Reagan, government income doubled but it was out spent with the help of a Democrat Congress. Obama has spent more money than ALL of the other president’s combined.

Everybody says Obama has an excuse because he inherited such a bad economy. Even if we assume this is true,. No President in Modern History faced as many obstacles as Bush did. Eight months into office came 911, which rocked the economy, shut down the airlines and created untold costs for rebuilding the Pentagon and to compensate the wounded, not to mention the enormous cost of Police, Fire, Medical etc… In addition along came Katrina which also costs us Billions if not Trillions of dollars. These plus fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. All of these major expenses and Bush’s biggest budget deficit was $389 Billion dollars in 2008 despite having all of these extremely expensive catastrophies. All Obama faced was an average recession that he turned into a serious depression and his biggest deficit so far has been $1.3 Trillion dollars, over 3 times higher than Bush.

I can’t understand what it is about broke that democrats don’t understand. You complain about austerity measures but we have no other choice. If we keep spending money the economy will soon collapse. We can take our medicine now or take a big dose later.

Steve E,
No need to be as macho as Rambo when the opposition is comprised of chicken wings.

They have one very big advantage, Michael — Little to No morality.
On the other hand most of the rest of us are greatly inhibited by it.

“They have one very big advantage, Michael — Little to No morality.”

They have one more major advantage over us Dave.. They have the BIG guns and we furnished them to ‘um.. Now, with little to no morality AND the bigger weapons AND the authority (that we also gave them) to order the military any which way they want, well.. it will be like shooting tanks with bb pellets.. We may get a few but their capable of destroying States. I don’t want to seem one-sided but the reality of it is, we can blow their heads off but only as they personally try to knock down our door but if they use what we provided through our tax money, it will be a short skirmish indeed. We need to focus on other alternatives.. high powered rifles and expert shooters should fit the bill, otherwise…

Explain Afghanistan, Tunny.

According to the top 5 nations for per catpia cosmetic surgeries are:1. South Korea2. Greece3. Italy4. Brazil5. ColombiaHowever, the number of cosmetic surgeries performed really doesn’t tell us much about spending for cosmetic surgery. Here in the U.S., prices for common plastic surgery procedures vary considerably:U.S. national average price (2010)facelift – $6,231tummy tuck – $5,130breast augmentation – $3,351eyelid surgery – $2,828lip augmentation – $1,683Unless the mix of surgeries for every country is the same (it is not), then rankings based on number of surgeries may be less revealing than we might think at first glance.

NO Flashman we just think you are trash, right along with the POS POTUS and his monkey looking wife Moochelle.

OK Brad…let’s see you answer this. Three and a half years ago, there were two courses to take when the bottom fell out. Government austerity, deregulation, and decentralization. This is the option urged by the Far Right and the GOP. Europe chose this route. The other route was to stimulate by targeted spending, not cut spending, and increase oversight to ensure non-risky financial practices are followed by the financial markets. This was the route chosen by President Obama.

Europe cut budgets, which cut investment and confidence, which tightened credit. business activity stalled, revenues went down, unemployed went up, budget deficits went up..and more austerity was imposed to handle the deficits created. And the spiral began. Deregulation alloowed the banks to voer up mistakes, and they gambled they could keep a lid on the data showing weakness in their financial markets..and the bets went on.

Obama did not increase spending, he kept it stable. (true…the lowest increase in spending in modern presidencies. Including your Darling…Ronnie Reagan). Spending was targeted at sectors for growth. Auto, New Energy, etc. the result/ the auto industry is strong, we are decreasing reliance on oil, and have made a significant step towards non reliance on ME oil. Financial markets are strong and stable, credit is now flowing, unemployment rates are dropping. We have a nice, but low, growth in GDP now.

So…go ahead…tell us how we should have followed the policies urged by the GOP and far Right and taken the route Europe took … this i want to read.

@Flashy, do yourself (and the rest of us) a favor and read Milton Friedman’s book “Money Mischief.” It is a popular economics text and sells for under $10.00. Mr. Friedman won the Nobel Prize for economics, and was Chief Economic Advisor to President Reagan, His book is an easy read for non-economists except for one chapter. He wrote that chapter for other economists and invited everyone else to skip it.
We need to learn from each other and help each other sift out the trash. The fate of our nation is at stake. Please do not criticise others for their “planted” contribution. Each of us has a partial view of this economic puzzle. Together, we can put the pieces together to discern the big picture.
If you have a contribution to make, why not “run it up the flag pole” and see who salutes?

No Flashy I am not a plant merely someone who has had to live through this nightmare unfolding in another country. Since 1945 Labour have been in power four times, and each time they left our country in debt, and each time it was worse than the last. If you doubt my statements just check the political history of the UK since 1945, and you will find not only that I am telling the truth but also that most of the problems are caused by entitlement programmes.

Frank..then you realize you are urging a comparison of apples and oranges and that there is absolutely no similarity or causal connections between GB and it’s economic path followed and the US. Nor can anyone with any rational analysis say the US is headed towards that economic path under those economic and geopolitical conditions.

For Mr. wisesooth: There is NO Nobel Prize for economics, it’s proper designation and it’s originator would the be National Bank of Sweden which created it in 1969, when ole Alfred being dead, could not object. It is announced on the same day as the “real” Nobel Prize’s and relies on the general ignorance of the public for it’s misappropriated claim.

Economic’s has no claim of validity since it is detached from any standard that can be even remotely associated with that of “objective truth” of the real empirical disciplines: physics, chemistry, biology, etc. and while it makes the attempt to employ mathematics to justify it’s claim to legitimacy………the resultant models, theories and conjectures, have no connection to any aspect of the “physical universe”, that the rest of the empirical disciplines have revealed to us.

This lack of empirical validity does not mean economics does not have a purpose…….

“A man must live by his work, and his wages must at least be enough to maintain him. They must even upon most occasions be somewhat more, otherwise it would be impossible for him to bring up a family, and the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation.”

This from the daddy of the fraud of economics, Adam Smith and I will leave it to the reader to attempt to interpret what this language suggests…….

Economic’s and it’s theories, have a direct correlation with “historical contexts” in which they existed……..from which two observations can be demonstrated.

1.) Theories tend to be formed to coincide with the “political necessities” which are prevalent at the time of their introduction, and to justify the continuation of them.

2.) When a crisis occurs, that challenges the present “conventional wisdom”, the response is typically reactive and seeks to maintain the status quo, so change is resisted……until a new equilibrium is reached…….while economists attempt to predict the future, in terms of the past.

Since no valid empirical basis exists for any of this, what ever the outcome……economic theory has no influence on where the resultant point of equilibrium will actually come to rest, but it will tend to favor a continuation of policies which benefit those who have reaped the rewards……..at the expense of those who have not.

You are either an administration shill, Flashman, or to call you dumber than dirt would be an insult to dirt. You’ve been here plenty long enough to have learned a few things, but you show no signs of such. No normal person would spend so much effort trying to misinform the readers.
So you choose, Flashman, shill or an insult to dirt?

For those who would like to Learn about the scientific aspects of Economics from an expert rather than from a guy who blames the Gold Standard for the Great Depression:
http://mises.org/pdf/esam.pdf

or you could read:

The Lords of Finance
Extreme Money
Power, Inc
The Great Divergence
Economics Unmasked
Debt; The First 5000 Years
The Great Divergence
Fool Me Twice
The Folly of Fools
Virolution

At which point you might actually have a chance to understand, how we got here,
where we are and what we are headed toward. ( warning: the books will challenge
everything you believe you know or think you understand )

For those who dare not risk this I recommend

The Merchants of Despair

Which will tell you what you wish to hear and allow you to persist in the
mythologies that our current path can be continued and everything will be just
fine.

Que sera, sera.

Galt, the great Book Title name-dropper.
The thing is, Galt, whether you have actually read those books or not is meaningless because you show no evidence of having learned anything useful.

“Lords of Finance”, written by Liaquat Ahamed, a former World Bank economist.
Oh yeah, we can expect a non-political view from him.
There are two main kinds of economists — those who build up the framework for their discipline to support the actions of Political Players, and those who give people the straight scoop about matters economic.
Those people who want to experience the latter can go here:
http://mises.org/

And, Galt, most of us don’t believe that “our current path can be continued”. That’s why Bob Livingston and others on this board are trying to wake people up to the reality of Big Government. As to why Flashman and yourself are trying to mislead people, I can only guess.

To DavidH;

Since you have not read the Lords of Finance, how would you know what was contained in it or any of the other books on the list?

It is essentially a history book, covering the period between 1920 and 1945, concentrating on the central banker’s of the period and the nations involved, the conditions at the time
and the actions they took…….it does not make any judgement regarding the results, it simply provides information regarding the forces at work, the interests of the various players involved, and the decisions made.

If you wish to challenge the factual nature of the history it relates, then the intelligent approach would be to actually read the book, or find a source which has already done so.

Once again, however, you have chosen to attempt to dismiss that which you have no
knowledge of, with an opinion you have no evidence for…….

As for the goals of your collaboration with Mr. Livingston and “others” on this board, which particular goals do you imagine you share with him…..? and who are these “others”?

While you say our current path is “unsustainable”, you really have no understanding
of why this is true……..and it is certainly not be because, we lack the magical description of capitalism, which has never existed…….and for which you are going to have to provide something more precise by way of explanation.

You may begin with it’s classical definition: The private ownership of the means of production…….and elaborate from there…….provided you understand, that is separate
from any political structure as are the other economic systems, which are variations on
“ownership of the means of production” and nothing more.

If you would care to attempt to debate intelligently any of the other positions I hold regarding why our path is “unsustainable”, then here is a list.

1.) The discipline of economics has no value because it has no empirical connection
to the universe which we inhabit. It does not matter which system you favor, none reflect empirical reality, so that while they may be different variations on a theme, none of them can provide a “sustainable path”.

2.) The present conventional wisdom and it’s historical antecedents have always focused on growth……our present problem is that we are “not growing” fast enough and the present political campaigns are about “who” can produce this “growth” and the various approaches that each would take. This is essentially irrelevant to the problem of “sustainability”…….because the growth model itself, is unsustainable……

3.) To make this clear we extend this to the following: infinite growth requires infinite
resources. In this universe, nothing is infinite, and is inextricably linked to the Laws of
Thermo Dynamics, specifically entropy which states that the amount of available energy of the universe will decrease over time. This is also true, for the individual components of the system, and for us, is dependent on the Sun for it’s continued output, as well as the stored energy of the planet, fueled by the Sun and representing 4.5 billion years worth of geological activity. Since no economic, political or cultural system takes this into account, none individually or in any combination represent a solution or a path to “sustainability”.

4.) There are a number of other “myths” which attempt to avoid the reality of the “unsustainable” path we are on……..these are.

A. Infinite Substitutabilty
B. The ‘environmental Kusnets curve’ ( EKC)
C. Alternative Energy Sources

This last rests on the developing of “fusion” power”, which is and has always been fifty
years in the future, since the 1950′s……..it requires dueterium which is plentiful, and tritium which is not, although this second source is omitted from the myth……and there is the small problem of a sustained reaction, which has always been the problem….and why stars are bigger than the largest of planets.

Feel free to attempt to argue any of this…….remembering if you can, that my positions
are as stated above……….and that my goal is also a sustainable future.

Did I say I knew what it contained, Galt?
You haven’t exactly impressed me with your knowledge. Rather you spend most of your comments to me trying to disparage me. That is a sure sign of weakness of knowledge.
When you do speak factually, Galt, it rarely makes any sense.
For instance:
Galt says — “The discipline of economics has no value because it has no empirical connection to the universe which we inhabit”.
The Austrian Economists don’t even try to back their economic discipline with empirical evidence because it is virtually impossible to predict what diverse populations of people with disparate ideas, needs, and desires are going to do in the marketplace from one year to the next. Economics isn’t like the natural sciences where they are dealing with a small number of factors which can be studied by experimentation. In the Marketplace the factors (mainly characteristics of fickle human beings) are almost limitless.
Yet there are economic truisms that need no experimental backing from intelligent people. Like the money supply, for instance. If it is increased without increasing the demand for money (more savings, investment, etc.) then it is intuitively obvious that the price of goods will go up, since there will be more dollars chasing the same amount of goods. An intelligent person doesn’t need experimentation or empirical data to figure that out.
Another obvious economic truism is that the creators of fiat money have few constraints on their largess, unlike Gold as money where they can’t just print more at will and thus devalue the dollars already in existence. We have seen the results of fiat money since the Federal Reserve was instituted. The value of the dollar has been on a relatively steady downhill trend since the Federal Reserve was created. Only the non-political economists have exposed the mechanisms leading that downhill trend in value to the people (those who have enough brains to listen).
I’m betting, Galt, that you didn’t read the article I posted a link to. Why not? Are you afraid to think outside your little Progressive Box?

Galt says (in usual double-speak fashion) — “The present conventional wisdom and it’s historical antecedents have always focused on growth……our present problem is that we are “not growing” fast enough and the present political campaigns are about “who” can produce this “growth” and the various approaches that each would take. This is essentially irrelevant to the problem of “sustainability”…….because the growth model itself, is unsustainable”.
Where is your empirical evidence, Galt, for your conjecture that “The present conventional wisdom and it’s historical antecedents have always focused on growth”? Where is your empirical evidence for your conjecture that the “growth model itself, is unsustainable”?
And why did you get off on the “growth” tangent in the first place, which has nothing to do with whether or not Capitalism is sustainable?
All I see in that comment is your usual penchant for attempting to snow the readers.

And finally to cap off my rebuttal to your fallacious double-speaking argument, I must point out to you the fallacy of your statement — “In this universe, nothing is infinite”.
Another bout of pure conjecture, stated as fact, by the master of double-speak.
If the Universe isn’t endless (that is infinite), how does it end? Is there a wall? What’s on the other side of the wall? Of course ultimately it makes no sense to the human mind because it’s virtually impossible for finite human minds to grasp infinity, just as it is virtually impossible for the human mind to make order out of your double-speak because it is just nonsense. And it isn’t backed by “empirical evidence”.

Please do not waste my time with claims of rebuttal that do not exist…..

If you do not understand why the universe is finite, then apparently your extensive knowledge base needs to be expanded……..there are many books available for this,
pick one and read it…….this should be one that deals with the “standard model” which
includes the big bang, inflation, the estimated age of 13.5 billion years or so, microwave back round radiation, and a discussion of the possible geometries, open, closed or flat.

You should also, understand that empirical models of the universe and various fields within it, such as Q.E.D. make use of a tool called “renormalization” which deals with the problems posed by “infinities”……..in attempted mathematical constructions, since when they appear they indicate error and must be canceled out.

Infinity is a mathematical concept, with no empirical connection to the universe you inhabit.

If you have evidence of anything that is infinite in this physical universe please identify it.

Thank you for your admission that your particular economic bias has no empirical connection to reality…….and therefor has no valid application……for me, it negates
all economic modeling for the reasons stated.

If you do not understand what the historical evidence for growth and the problems it presented, I would recommend Collapse, by Jarod Diamond…..and/or conversations
with any of the following, Sumerians, Assyrians, Mayans, although this may prove rather difficult.

As for any further “evidence” regarding why the growth model is unsustainable, it is not required…….you have been told what you need to understand my position and why.
The evidence for it is contained in the explanation of that position, nothing further is required…….understanding entropy and the laws of thermodynamics is that evidence.

If you would care to dispute those laws, I am not that person….and if you do it effectively,
then you may claim a “real Nobel Prize”.

So, DavidH….it would seem that you have chosen not to engage in an attempt at
intelligent debate……..which was expected, and I have no further time to waste with you…
play with flashy, he is more your speed and you both seem more interested in wasting time
with endless babble than actually communicating anything of value……

Choosing to remain “willfully ignorant” is your choice, and while you may have a high opinion regarding what you think you know…….in my world, you appear to know very little if anything at all……….and this fact is exposed with every word you post. My advice is to avoid responding to my posts…..and to begin reading the books that I have recommended. I know you won’t do either………

Que sera, sera!

Ohhh, you’ve read books, Galt. I’m so impressed.
As usual, you provide nothing but fallacious tangential arguments that prove nothing. If you really did your homework, you’d know that all those things are Theories, and that is all.
So answer me with something intelligent, Galt — How does the universe end? And please don’t bore me with tangential issues like Big Bang that have nothing to do with whether or not the universe ends, and certainly nothing to do with whether or not Capitalism is sustainable.
You’re an ignoramus, Galt, who apparently has no cognitive ability of his own if it isn’t in a book.
I’ve worked with your kind (unfortunately) almost everywhere I’ve been employed. The kind who learn enough big words to snow the ignorant. But they’ve always been underperformers of their assigned tasks. All talk and no production. Which likely explains why you embrace Progressivism. The losers generally do.

DaveH proves once again that he is just a rude ahole with not a shred of interest in moving the goal post forward only wishing to be right with his limited knowledge and sources of information (Mises, Heritage or Cato). Completely incapable of intelligent debate, absolutely convinced that only his view point matters and certainly not interested in possibly learning anything from anyone. Dave it is so easy to push your buttons, you are so predictable. Grow up would you.

Nice math Galt. But unfortunately, I fear it falls on deaf ears.

The GOP/Conservative/TP/American Taliban want to legislate our social lives, and economically and physically drive the middle class into serfdom while leaving the wealthy and rich unfettered freedoms and welfare.

They want to eliminate taxes and cut programs which made this nation great. They cry for states rights, yet enact legislation which directly intrudes upon those rights. Death With Dignity Acts, medical marijuana, supporting DOMA, etc.

Oregon is initiating an innovative and experimental change to Medicare. The Feds are expected to support it. It shows promise and attacks the budget issue from a different avenue.

http://m.npr.org/news/front/153982708?start=30

This morning….yep, I listened to a Congressman (GOP TPer) who attacked it, called it anti American and having ‘dangerous similarity’ to the HCR Act. In essence, rule of thumb these days..if it promotes social freedom, or gives more advantage to the Middle Classes…they’re against it. If it promotes more of the welfare for the wealthy and gives more power over us by corporate America…they’re for it.

It may be……..but it applies to the figures cited……..the point, is that the figures are
wrong………429 billion in interest would make more sense…….

Explain to us, Flashman, why we needed only Government that spent 3% of our GDP in 1900, but now we need Government that spends over 40% of our GDP?

Looks like the Socialist State of Oregon wants to try a 5-year plan. And in 5 years they’ll have another. Like good little Socialists they will continue ignoring the results of their meddling and instead of admitting failure of their centralized socialized decision-making they will just offer a different version of the same old thing — More Government Meddling.

DaveH,
A 5 Year Plan? Doesn’t that sound a bit “Stalinist”?? Oh yeah, forgot – Oregon. OK, nevermind. . .

I’ll go with that Vig…because the answer is obvious. Lower unemployment, increased productivity, GDP growth, stable financial markets. Even as our largest trading partner (the EU) is going down the drain after following austerity policies which are almost identical to the policies urged by the Right and rejected.

I see a lot of vague generalizations there, Flashman, but nothing specific.
How about, for example, you provide us with some specific austerity measures that those countries have implemented, and of course provide references since your word on this board means zip.

I have read that the two most successful economies in the EU, Germany and Sweeden, you know the ones that are providing the money to prop up the overspending governments such as Greece are the ones who best practice austerity.

Flushy, so you’re blaming the austerity measures for the collapse?!! LOL!!! You’ll be one of the idiot all for the bail out!

SIC ‘EM VIG!

Sirian…I haven’t forgotten that book you suggested as reading. It is on my list. Just haven’t had time.

So what is your explanation / opinion why Europe followed the path of government austerity in times of economic recession and is here it is, and we took the alternate route and are in much better shape.

What caused the differences in economic stability ?

Flashman doesn’t need to read the book, Sirian. He already knows the truth. He just doesn’t speak it, because he chooses to misinform the readers so as to aid himself and his superiors in the fleecing of the American public.

The explanation, Flashman, is that your statement is untrue. Europe (the PIGS especially) has been spending more on Government than the US for quite some time (probably since our country began).
For those who would like to investigate the truth (something you can’t expect from Flashman), go here and pick country names to learn more about each:
http://heritage.org/index/ranking
The US currently spends about 42% of its GDP (still way too high) on Government (all levels).
Greece (as already mentioned) spends about 50% of its GDP on Government.
Italy spends about 51% of its GDP on Government.
Portugal spend over 49% of its GDP on Government.

Dave…have you checked the recent figures for the past three years on the southern governments of Europe? Didn’t think so. Check ‘em out, what was cut, what could not be cut, and compare to the decrease in manufacturing, banking, and growth.

Here’s a hint…it takes more than 5 minutes to do the data gathering and analysis. I don’t believe there is much out there concerning the recent figures…but go ahead, look for a catchy title to link up with.

Or you can read the WSJ or Bloomberg. Bloomberg has a nice neat analysis … the Journal has several articles. if you want to do it yourself, you’d best have available a good stat calculator/program which will draw out the graphs. It’ll save you a heckuva lot of time …

Then, Flashman, since you say — “It takes more than 5 minutes to do the data gathering and analysis” — it should be no trouble for you to provide us the proof. You really don’t think I would waste my time trying to back up your unreliable statements, do you?

I personally don’t see where he thinks that there is time for us to repent and prepare! We’re tied to this Global economy and when Europe finally goes, and it gonna be like dominos!!! Once the first one goes, the procession will be SWIFT!!! We’ll then see what kinda union they have over there then! It’s gonna change life as we know it and ain’t none of it gonna be good!!!
I personally believe that we are living in the VERY LAST DAYS, and about to see the fulfillment of James 5:1-8;

“Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days. Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter. Ye have condemned and killed the just; and he doth not resist you. Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient; stablish your hearts: for the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.” (KJV)

A recent poll reported that roughly 75% of all Americans claimed that they were Christians! I thought WOW! Where’s everybody at Sun. morn?!! LOL!!! If the rapture were to happen today, I’d be totally in awe if 75% of church members, not to mention the general population of the United States, would be present at that great meeting in the air. (I Thess. 4:16-18) Do You know what the Olivette Prophecies are? Before entering Jerusalem for the last time, Jesus sat on the Mount of Olives and told the Diciples for the third time what was going to befall Him. They just weren’t getting it. But He told them not to worry because He would come again. When asked what would be the signs of His return, He gave them these prophecies. (Matt. ch.24, Mark ch.13, and Luke ch.21) Luke ch.17 also touches a little on the End-time Prophecies. Along with many other Old and New Testament prophecies. Study them! Know them! Memorize them! Is your lamp trimmed and BURNING?!! (Matt. 25:1-13) Because if you’re not LOOKING up, (Luke 21:28) you SURELY to GOD must be BLIND!!! (II Cor. 4:3&4) Surely you don’t want to be TOLD to go hang with the GOATS!!! (Matt. 25:31-46) JESUS IS COMING everybody!!! I pray that you’re ready! If you’re not, you may pray a prayer similar to this: “Dear God, I know that You love me. I admit that I’m a sinner. Please forgive me for my sins. I place my faith in Jesus as my Savior and Lord. Thank You for saving me. In Jesus’ name I pray. Amen.” If you prayed that prayer and meant it with all your heart, know for a certainty that it is impossible for God to lie! (Rom. 10:13) This is what it means to be born-again! (John 3:3) Go find yourself a church, forget about a perfect one, they don’t exist. Surround yourself with Christian friends, they won’t be perfect either, that’s why we need Jesus! Emmerce yourself in Gods’ Word so you’ll know how to fight off ole’ nick. (Eph. 6:13-18) You’re in the Army now, soldier! And now it’s your job to bring as many lost sheep back into the fold as possible! (Matt. 5:14-16) What?!! Did you think it was going to be easy?! (II Tim. 3:12) God be with you! I wish for everyone who reads this post to know that the writer is a certified Jesus nut with plenty of documentation to prove it!

Oh and Wayne, AWESOME tie Dawg! LOL!!!

When Her Majesty the Queen has to start living on a budget Sirian, you KNOW that IT’S gettin’ BAD!!!